Why aren't we using ARM CPUs in desktops? Aren't they

>Power efficient
>Desktop
Nice b8

>>55760367
make a powerful arm chip and you will be getting the same performance for less power. isn't that good?

>>55760390
>make a powerful arm chip
you can't do that for the same reason why Intel tried (and failed) to make a less powerful x86 chip for your phone.

>>55760315
It will be inefficient to run x86 code on it, no?

>>55760315
Ehh, what software would you be planning to run on this theoretical desktop computer? Most desktop software is running as x86 instructions, not ARM.

There's no reason you can't make a powerful desktop ARM SoC. No one is willing to spend the money developing one yet.

Would people be interested in a moderately powerful ARM pc? I found a SoC with 4x 2ghz A72 cores, PCie lanes and open firmware but it would need a gpu. There's supposed to be 8, 16 and 32 core versions in 2017 that are probably pin compatible. It would probably cost about $50,000 to get it into production via crowd funding.

>>55761158
>It would probably cost about $50,000 to get it into production via crowd funding.
You are underestimating the price of an ARM license by an order of magnitude.

>>55760315
I use PPC, much better than ARM shit or x86

>>55760315
Because they're all about power efficiency, not power. If it was as powerful as X86, it'd be a lot less efficient.

>>55760315
>Aren't they more power efficient?
Why would that matter? Also, the processing power of ARM SoCs is directly proportional to the blobs they need, with the better ones available now days requiring signed blobs at multiple levels to even boot.

>>55760315
Right, and next you'll argue for the legalization of pedophilia. That's where your kind of slippery slope moral relativism leads.

>>55760315
If you care about efficiency, why do you want a desktop?

Use a laptop, or fucking even an orange pi plus 2 and shut the fuck up

>>55761158
>$50,000 only to produce
Intel/AMD put millions/billions in production and you expect that to compete? lmao

>>55761158
The production costs of a chip is closer to 100M though

Because there's a shitload of proprietary software desktop users use every day that isn't compiled for ARM, which the developers can't be fucked to recompile for ARM.

>>55760315

They only are more efficient at a low power. At a higher power (eg. desktop use), x86 is more efficient.

>>55761387

There's a contradiction in what you wrote.

>>55760315
Arm cpus have poor IPC (instruction per cycle) - its a trade-off for simplicity and low transistor count.
Arm cpus don't have advanced instruction sets (aesni, avx, sse). Same thing, such instuctions require huge amount of transistors.
Arm cpus cant clock high. There is no 2.5+ghz chips on the market. I'm not sure but it also might be architecture limitation, eg long chains of logic gates.

>>55761515
No, its not. You don't get it is all.
ARM chips are small because that's where they excel. They are most efficient when they're small, low power units.
When Intel tried to make competition, their x86 models couldn't provide the same power:efficiency and so they gave up.
If ARM was to upscale their chips to the same power as x86 chips however, their efficiency would go to shit.

Learn to fucking read you mongoloid.

>>55761477
>companies spend billions on something
>this has anything to do with its intrinsic value
you know companies just love to burn through money and inflate prices for no reason

>>55761770
While you are correct to an extent, such as in the case of Gillette spending "$300,000,000" developing the mach III, manufacturing "good" microprocessors is expensive. Why do you think so many others besides Intel and AMD failed?

File: 1403837987365.png (48KB, 400x389px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 400x389px

>>55761512
>Because there's a shitload of proprietary software desktop users use every day that isn't compiled for ARM, which the developers can't be fucked to recompile for ARM.
Only Normies care about proprietary software.

>>55760817
>run x86 code
Why?

Will x86/86-64 stay forever until the end of time?

>>55760789
I think they kinda succeeded

>>55761904
Of course not. It'll eventually be taken over by something else, but the transition will be slow and painful as fuck due to MUH LEGUSY

>>55761935
>slow and painful
Only if you use pig-disgusting non-free software.

>>55761954
Even for free as in freedom software, it'll be a slow as fuck and painful experience.
>Implying being free as in freedom isn't already slow and painful as fuck

>>55761968
>slow as fuck and painful experience.
How so?

>>55762068
The Software is often slower and/or less feature filled.
It crashes more often than proprietary options.
Updates can be a lot slower to come around, if they do at all.
And besides all that, you'll never be free from the NSA/FBI anyway.

>>55761644

The one who should learn to read and to express ideas with the proper words is you.

You said exactly what I said, except in a wrong way, twice. And you're so stupid that you started attacking and insulting me as soon as you saw my critique to your way of expressing yourself.

>ARM chips ... are most efficient when they're small
>If ARM was to upscale ... their efficiency would go to shit

What's different from what I said in >>55761515 ?
>They only are more efficient at a low power. At a higher power (eg. desktop use), x86 is more efficient.

...the idiocy of who wrote the former, that's what's different.

>>55762227
>Implying I'd read what you wrote in a response not aimed at me
Get fucked, cuck.

Cortex A53 roughly matches n2840 and Cortex A72 (non-gimped) matches the firsr intel core M's or celeron g1840 in integer and float performance, doesn't seem very attractive to me

>>55761810
He probably thinks a magic company will just come out of nowhere after amd dies.

>>55761158
>build ARM gaming rig
>have no games or production software that would require the crunching power
Your business plan needs more thinking. A lot more.

>>55761158

Are you a big guy?

>>55760817
Linux can be (and usually is) compiled to ARM. Raspberry distros all use ARM architecture.

The latest Nvidia Tegra also did this voodoo code translation mumbo-jumbo.

File: IMG_20160710_125241.jpg (2MB, 2368x3200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2368x3200px

But I do anon

>>55763283
>>55760315
Just buy an integrated Atom CPU or "Intel Compute Stick". Try using an Ubuntu on there. You will realize how big the performance gap is.

>>55762713
>games
Children should be play in the dirt. It strengthens their immune system.
>production software that would require the crunching power
Octave
R
Ardour
Blender
Compilers
...

>>55763300
>Just buy an integrated Atom CPU or "Intel Compute Stick". Try using an Ubuntu on there. You will realize how big the performance gap is.
Fast ARM CPUs do exist, my friend.
AMD Opteron A1100.

>>55763316
>Fast ARM CPUs do exist, my friend.
Yeah, but are they cheap?

I mean a top-tier ARM SoC is piss cheap.
So is an Atom.

But what about a better one like this A1100?
Compared to a "low-power" Intel Core CPU?

File: Selection_493.png (26KB, 919x313px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 919x313px

>>55763322
The AMD ARM Opterons have lots more cache and memory bandwidth than any Intel Atom.

>>55763341
That's alright, but what about raw performance?
Too bad passmark does not have these A series Opterons. (Too lazy to check if there is a Passmark for ARM at all.)

>>55763364
>raw performance
Define raw performance

>>55763341
>A1100
that's not even out yet senpai, and not sure if it ever will be

>>55763372
Something you can compare. A benchmark suite like Passmark. Something you could compare.

>>55763395
>Passmark
Proprietary and as such useless

>>55761361
Mah nigga

>>55761954
I'm not a freetard but I do have to say the free software movement makes using different architectures so much better. There's no way I'd be able use everything I need on PowerPC and MIPS processors without it

>>55763404
ok ok, linpack then, bro, get the hint.

File: 1469085765765.jpg (10KB, 255x167px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 255x167px

>>55763283
ewww

Windows has parts that are written in x86 assembly. Rewriting them in ARM would take years. Same with drivers.

>>55763504
>Windows
Irrelevant Normie OS

>>55761158
This would cost millions of dollars.

>>55763283
Cute, what tablet?

>>55763283
>tfw no Debian phone
Every single phone OS sucks.

Because there's not really a reason to. The only benefit I can think of is cost but that just means it'd appeal to casuals more until they realize they can't run their Windows programs on it.

>>55763571
BB10OS doesn't

>>55763633
I ain't buying BB anytime soon nigga.

>>55763655
Enjoy your inferior phone

>>55763504
>Windows has parts that are written in x86 assembly. Rewriting them in ARM would take years
>what is Windows RT

>>55760315
>>55761845

>HURR DURR WHY DOESN'T EVERYONE USE A CHIPSET THAT LITERALLY NOBODY HAS WRITTEN ANY DESKTOP APPLICATIONS FOR

>HURR DURR YOU DON'T NEED YOUR DESKTOP APPLICATIONS IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!!

>HURR DURR DON'T USE PHOTOSHOP WHEN U CAN USE GIMP INSTEAD HURR DURR!!!!!

Fucking libtards GET THE FUCK OFF MY BOARD

File: 1469344881809.jpg (26KB, 480x526px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 480x526px

Because ARM fucking blows. It has horrible single thread performance which means to get basic i3 desktop performance you'd need to to cool a dual-core ARM chip with liquid nitrogen and make it stay at 10 GHz or have like 10 cores running at 2GHz which will result in horrible single thread performance (worse than AMD). It also has horrible performance per watt so expect higher electrical bills. Finally it's incompatible with x86 software which is the reason why people get a desktop in the first place. Some people want to do more than play angry birds, crazy I know.

>>55763717
>he doesn't know this is a freetard board
lurk more xd

>>55763747
ARM linux software sucks really really bad to be honest. Tried to get used to having a raspberry pie as a desktop with debian mobile on it but all the software just plain fucking blows.

>>55763767
>debian mobile
Opinion discarded, you're just that shitty troll

>>55763790
It is what it is man. The full x86 desktop of Debian does more than the ARM mobile version of Debian. Deal with it.

>>55763717
>LITERALLY NOBODY HAS WRITTEN ANY DESKTOP APPLICATIONS FOR
Literally thousands of free desktop applications work just fine on ARM.

>>55761477
>Intel/AMD put millions/billions in production and you expect that to compete? lmao
I didn't say make a SoC. A company already has this SoC, the 4x A72 version with pcie and SATA is out now, the 8, 16 and 32 core versions are due 2017.

They are just using them in NAS and networking products for now, no one has made a SBC computer from them. There's a dev board but it's filled with SATA and 10Gbe ports.

All you need to do is have a board designed with a decent amount of USB ports and other things like audio.

>>55763804
>The full x86 desktop of Debian does more than the ARM mobile version of Debian
Name one difference. You can't.

>>55763767
That's just, assberry pi man, try odroid c2 or dragonboard 410c, everything open source on x86 works the same on them

>>55761833

Well, pathetic frogposter, those 'Normies' are the driving force that dictates this sort of shit.

>>55763808
But they all blow. Call me when they port the desktop version of photoshop or the desktop version of adobe premiere pro cc to ARM.

ARM itself also fucking blows, performance is just abysmal. Might be able to do some video editing if thet made an ARM chip with 1 million cores, maybe.

>>55763804
>It is what it is man
Yeah, it's just Debian.
>The full x86 desktop of Debian does more than the ARM mobile version of Debian
But that's wrong. Eat a dick, you fucking twat.

File: X10SDV-16C-TLN4F.png (132KB, 510x311px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 510x311px

>>55763814
Those things are already DOA. See pic related.

>>55763851
Photoshop doesn't run on x86 Linux either, anon.

>>55761545
Carefull don't believe everything you get told at architecture class. Lookup ARM Neon. IPC and frequency doesn't mean shit with a really good branch predictor and instruction prefetcher. I have a friend who's intern there and he told me there is some insane shit coming up (he's also pissed about the softbank thing) .

File: 1451599975106.png (128KB, 303x306px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 303x306px

>claims to """""need""""" Photoshop
>is actually unemployed or not employed in digital media at all

>>55763888
ARM will always be 10 steps behind x86 though. By the time they make an OK chip, intel will already have something 2-4X more energy efficient than >>55763872

>>55760315
Windows couldn't be ported to it.

Actually, Apple could make their desktop line use ARM chips. Maybe it'll turn out like this in the future.

>>55763913
>Actually, Apple could make their desktop line use ARM chips. Maybe it'll turn out like this in the future.
Apple is irrelevant now. They milked the logo too much and now normies are bored of it. All they have now is overpriced turds less people want to buy now.

>>55763913
Windows has been ported to ARM already - it is called Windows RT. It didn't sell though, no legacy software & MS forced it to use the shitty tile interface for everything but Office.

>>55763972
Well, yeah. But Apple is already experienced in switching architectures.

>>55764010
see >>55763932

File: 1421165704604.png (137KB, 1631x1571px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 1631x1571px

>be freetard
>don't even notice an architecture change
>mfw

>>55764010
Not on Mac, they put the App Store on x86 and it still failed to get many people from downloading software directly from publishers.
But I think they're bruteforcing it now, starting by removing the Anywhere option from Gatekeeper in Sierra.

>>55763744
> Apple Cyclone is ARM
> Performance is fucking fast
> hurr durr

>>55763504
>Windows has parts that are written in x86 assembly. Rewriting them in ARM would take years.
Not really. Windows is written in C++, C and C#. Only parts of it is written in assembler for performance. And as said earlier the OS is already ported to ARM.

>>55760315
>desktop
>power efficiency
Who gives a shit. I want raw power you faggot. It's a desktop not a fucking smartphone.

>>55764301
>raw power
Botnet power (c) Intel feat. Microsoft

>>55764359
intel processors have one botnet in the CPU, ARM boards have 5 in each component (SoC, wireless module, video module (assberry Pi has a threadX microkernel in the videocore))

>>55764301
https://www.raptorengineering.com/TALOS/prerelease.php
POWER
O
W
E
R

>>55764380
AMD Opteron A1100 isn't a SoC and doesn't have WiFi or video

>>55764385
I'm so hyped for this

>>55761387
Apple A9x is stronger than core i5 and use less than 10% off energy

one word: video games
btfo

>>55764385
>for around $3,700 USD

Oh my fucking god.

>>55764444
Economy of scale

>>55760315
1) desktops are dead market
2) Intel lobby
3) is more profitable work with cellphones and tables
4) apple now work in a MacBook powered by a arm processor
5) developers are too lazy too make a migration

>>55764444
Show me a cheaper free as in freedom system with comparable performance

>>55764385
Unless it's Xeon tier or better not worth the price desu

Instruction Set Architecture (ISA), isn't particularly relevant as far as performance and efficiency is concerned in general use cases. The reason ARM can't get into the desktop market is that it can't run the already existing commercial software, so no one wants to develop a competitively high performance processor to compete in the desktop space. It's not about any particular property of the ISA's but the fact that they are different and one already dominates the market.

>>55760817
>x86 on an ARM chip

Is /g/ full of retards like this or is this an isolated incident?

>>55764420
A9x vs MacBook Core-M. maybe.
But even A9x vs Core-M without massive throttling of MacBook fanless design, A9x is going to be obliterated.

File: 1461157667503.jpg (120KB, 675x900px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 675x900px

>>55764393
>AMD Opteron A1100 isn't a SoC
Well now, let's fact check you with the product page for the A1100 over at AMD's website:
http://www.amd.com/en-us/products/server/opteron-a-series
>For organizations on the path to mainstreaming ARM for Data Center workloads, Opteron A1100 is an enterprise-class ARM-based SoC delivering scale-out performance, energy efficiency and optimized TCO.
>Opteron A1100 is an enterprise-class ARM-based SoC delivering scale-out performance, energy efficiency and optimized TCO.
>Opteron A1100 is ... SoC
You were saying?

>>55764467
it's common to see retards who can't tell that you can't port some x86 apps (proprietary)

>>55764467
>what is emulation
why are you retarded?

>>55764462
https://www.raptorengineering.com/TALOS/power_advantages.php

>>55764503
Why would you want to emulate x86?

>>55764444
were you expecting 50 bucks?

File: 1469065121014.jpg (48KB, 620x349px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 620x349px

>>55764467
This is b8

>>55764512
>literally retarded

>>55764503
Emulation is inefficient way to create ecosystem that supports features that host doesn't.

>>55764532
muh games
muh photoshop

>>55764516
No, I was expecting one grand.

>>55764503
>>55764489
My point is you'd have to reengineer a lot of the software in order for ARM to have any chance in the desktop market. Many OSs are largely written in assembly which take advantage of the shittiest architecture ever (x86)

>>55764462
While I do want to see the Raptor guys succeed, I agree with you that it's going to be rough to come close to the utility offered by a Xeon workstation. That said, it might be a decent way to have a development environment for the included FPGAs. Obviously a huge investment, beyond the reach or needs of most consumers, but that is one possible use.

>>55764562
>a lot of the software
only proprietary software which no one but normies cares about

>>55764574
Uh no, you'd have to pretty much build a new operating system. That takes years to get right.

>>55764562
>Many OSs are largely written in assembly which take advantage of the shittiest architecture ever (x86)

Why would you write an OS in Assembly?
What are you even talking about?

>>55764584
http://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/8.5.0/arm64/iso-cd/

>>55764584
There is, Linux OS for ARM, there is iOS and there is Windows ARM, all of the OSes have been written already, stop. Just fucking stop.

>>55764535
>>55764546
>>55764562
>actual mental illness

>>55764601
Are you fucking retarded? There's a shit load of assembly that goes into the kernel of an operating system

>>55764584
Mint is already booming among normies and in some cases simpler to use than Win10 or Wintiles 8.1
>>55764562
Depends, most of the proprietary software is written in some higher language like C++ and have big Python / Lua components (for example custom photoshop brushes) and they probably use the standard C++ library for some calculations, all they need to do is to use a toolkit like GTK+ or Qt instead, and there's graphics libraries like Cairo or Qt Image that have similar function names and almost look like the GDI+ API's, the work isn't huge but I guess they have to see it worth (people adopting the architecture). Now that I look at it it's pretty doomed lol, unless ARM or POWER or whatever offers something unique (like x3 x4 performance at same price)

>>55764636
>Are you fucking retarded? There's a shit load of assembly that goes into the kernel of an operating system
Linux is 99% C

>>55764548
how did you do the math? keep in mind the price of a POWER8 cpu alone is above 1k

>>55764636
assembly is only used for system initilization and boot / enabling stuff like interrupts retard

>>55764636
Kernel is not an operating system, operating system is something build around kernel.

even so, almost all if not every kernel after BSD is written primarily with C and assembly

but operating systems are primarily been written in C++ for years now.

>>55764625
>Linux OS for ARM
no consumer would use that
>iOS
We're talking about desktops
>Windows ARM
Maybe in the works, best chance we have for an actual desktop arm that is marketable. It's taking years to get right like I fucking said.

>>55764665
I didn't do the maths, I don't know much about POWER8, all I did was see the price and was, let's say surprised.

>>55764687
>consumer
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Consumer

File: Screen Shot 2016-07-26 at 11.12.22 AM.jpg (75KB, 1200x378px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1200x378px

>>55764674
No, a kernel is part of the operating system

>>55764687
>iOS
>We're talking about desktops

Are you retarded? Just add window manager and you have desktop iOS, it's not that complicated.

>>55764700
Of course they would avoid that

That's why GNU isn't being sold in stores to normies unlike Windows

>>55764713
>completely closed source
>no file manager
>not configurable

k

>>55764767
>I don't know what I'm talking about
>I'm going to continue to talk about it

>>55764780
>I don't know what I'm talking about
>I'm going to continue to talk about it

Fuck off, nobody wants to use Debian Mobile, it's literally worse than Windows Mobile. That says a lot.

>>55760390
It doesn't work that way.

>>55761158
>ARM SoC
What is this meme?

>>55765197
Debian Mobile =/= Debian
When will you understand that?

>>55765197
0/10 troll

>>55764483
you are retarded or something ?

>>55760367
just make 128 core cpu

>>55764707
>I'm literally retarded

>>55763872
>Those things are already DOA. See pic related.
ARM chips are much cheaper the 4x A72 chip is probably $50 if not less. The interesting thing is they split up this chip into different parts rather than a full SoC, and join them on an interposer. As a result they can make a 32 core version by just putting 16 of the cheap 4 core dies on it.

A 32 core version would probably be around $200 per chip at most.

>>55761274
He's not after a license if you read. He's after a pre fabbed chip

>>55764420

In benchmark that doesn't use x86 features (SSE, AVX etc) but optimized for iOS?

>>55764503
Are you retarded?
Have you seen how long it takes to boot Windows XP on an ARM phone running an x86 emulator?

>>55760315
>ARM
>efficiency

This is a misnomer. ARM designs are low power, the most efficient chips out there are server Xeons. They excel in especially low TDP areas where large X86 haven't scaled well. ARM still holds the crown for microcontrollers and the smallest low power cores, but there are numerous X86 designs that can operate sub 5w one way or another which end up side by side with the largest ARM cores.

An ARM design could be fabbed with to achieve higher clocks, the Cortex A73 would be perfect for it, but no one has bothered trying it yet. Its quite a large investment for something that isn't guaranteed to turn a profit. Years ago some firm created a 3ghz Cortex A9 chip which was stupid high frequency for the time, but when it was finally finished it was already irrelevant.
AMD's K12 attempts to be this very thing, though targeting the datacenter. It still remains to be seen how well it performs, or if it will even see the light of day. Like this anon points out: >>55763872

X86 designs are excelling in throughput per watt. AMD's Summit Ridge with 8 cores around 3ghz inside of a 95w TDP is only a stone's throw away from 65w. They could end up with their X86 arch grossly outperforming their K12 ARM arch. The only way K12 will be relevant is if its massively higher IPC, an FPU beast, or it clocks absurdly high per watt to make up for its performance deficit.

ARM excels in low TDP roles. Its never gone toe to toe with modern high power X86, so it would be crazy to expect it in a desktop.

>>55760950
>what software would you be planning to run on this theoretical desktop computer?

For normie desktop shit? Chrome, GMail, Facebook, Youtube, Netflix, Skype

For development and such? xterms with GCC, GHC, Vim, Emacs, ssh

>>55765552
>A 32 core version would probably be around $200 per chip at most.
It would also be at least 100X weaker than that 16-core xeon d chip.

This Is why ARM chips are so cheap, they're fucking dogshit. That 16-core ARM chip will probably have a TDP of like 9001 watts too lmao.

>>55766107
AMD's 8 core 2 GHz ARM64 chip with 12 MB cache total has a TDP of 32W

>>55761923
Yea that's why they scrapped it and don't make them anymore... fucking idiot kys

>>55765981
Thank you, based anon.

>>55760315
You can get desktop solution with ARM, such as the Chromebits. They're power efficient and dogshit slow, but perfect for Normiebook and Jewtube.

Why aren't we using superior RISC-V?

>>55763899
Wow i guess freetards have literally no hobbies.

>>55767055
What hobby do you need Photoshop for?

>>55767082
Photo editing isnt a hobby?

>>55767100
Ansel Adams didn't need Photoshop to create master pieces

>>55760315
Weak-ass proprietary garbage with no commercial software base that brings nothing to the table and won't scale well anyway. RISC is shit, stop living in the '80s.

And if you gave a shit about saving a watt or two, you wouldn't be using a desktop in the first place.

>>55767118
Ok? I'd rather spend my weekends editing photos for fun than toying with "muh free os" to get firefox to install.

>>55767118
And you don't need a computer to do half of the shit you do on your computer, that doesn't mean it isn't a nice tool to have.

>>55767161
Actually x86 is more power efficient than ARM now (see xeon-d processors) and it's like 90% RISC. Modern x86 processor cores are actually a risc core with a cisc interpreter so the risc vs cisc argument died eons ago.

>>55767161
>no commercial software
Merely one counter-example suffices to disprove your universal claim.
https://connect.redhat.com/zones/red-hat-enterprise-linux

>>55760315
Performance doesn't compare

>>55767225
>Performance
Define performance.

>>55766019
>WHOOSH

>>55767232
It's ability to render shit, compute, and play games? Why is that even a question? It also doesn't support much of the software x86 PCs do

>>55763878
unofficially it does

>>55760315
Intel managed to improve X86 power efficiency faster than ARM CPUs have improved in performance.

>>55767168
>toying to get FireFox installed.

Nice meme. It isn't true.

>>55767118
You just went full retard.

>>55767201
Hell, there isn't even really a difference anymore now that "pure" RISC is pretty much dead outside of the embedded market. I was simply attacking the /g/ circlejerk that "RISC" chips are the best because they kicked ass over two decades ago (and ARM was never one of them)

>>55767205
Yeah, because a desktop user really gives a shit about whether or not Red Hat supports it. It may be convenient for you to take it literally, but that doesn't negate the fact that ARM as an architecture has an absolutely pathetic desktop software base outside of the GNU space.

>>55763283
Nice keyboard pleb

>>55761416
kek

>>55761361
What PPC? Im about to get a dual 1.42GHz G4 PowerMac running.

I had a G5 but I fucking hated that case (it was dented and wasnt a particularly high end G5).

I love the G4 case

You can have an ARM desktop PC right now.

Pick one of the Chinese media boxes that uses ARM and can run Linux (most run Android and don't have a Linux distribution image, but a bunch do and *very* few even come with it installed).

>>55769931
They're all a bit weak still, and none is 64-bit with 4 GiB or more RAM
This is the best bet for a reasonably powerful desktop:
https://www.96boards.org/products/ee/cello/

+ 8 or 16 GiB DDR3 RAM
+ PCIe graphics card

>>55764385

Enjoy your 600W.

>>55770385
> 64-bit with 4 GiB or more RAM
Wrong, multiple of these exist?

For example the Tronsmart Draco AW80, but I've also seen at least four more - mostly with Allwinner A80 chipsets.

I didn't check if they have a Linux distro ported yet.

That said, why is 4GB RAM a requirement? You can run Linux fine on 2GB or even 1GB RAM.

If you want to do heavy processing and games and shit, honestly, buy an Intel...

File: 1393568371022.jpg (27KB, 314x437px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 314x437px

>>55770788
512MB of RAM? What do you need 256MB of RAM for goy?

>>55770821
You can still run Linux on that, but you'll have to drop the more RAM hungry GUI applications.

Not something I expect the Gentoo-averse /g/ of today to live with. But 2GB RAM allows for a completely normal pleb desktop. 4GB RAM is for Windows and muh games.

> goy
Israel can't into computers.

>>55770938
>4GB RAM is for Windows and muh games.
I'm daily driving 2 GB right now and you're retarded.

>Israel can't into computers.
Some pretty good shit has come out of Intel's Haifa campus over the years.

ARM is better for home automation and such, but the use case you are describing doesn't make any sense with ARM.

File: GetGoodsImage.png (51KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 300x300px

>>55760315
People DO use ARM CPUs in desktops. People who don't care about performance.

ARM works fine for desktops. A fucking $5 Raspberry Pi cn play 1080p video. OpenGL-ES 3D games and programs have worked on ARM chips for 5 years now. You can get fucking 8 core chips, and chips running at 2.5GHz. Debian and Ubuntus ARM repos literally have 99+% of the software in the x86 repos

People who say ARM isnt appropriate for desktops, or ARM has poor performance, are fucking retards.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73prhNQwLQs


This video was posted THREE FUCKING YEARS AGO
https://youtu.be/HXKCBqAKxXM?t=25s

Heres one from 2 years ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9yhCumNOiY

Heres FIVE GOD DAMN YEARS AGO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIJ7567tAxs

https://youtu.be/F3VTWISu34U?t=2m6s

https://youtu.be/uqBq9X_m5yQ?t=10m22s

>>55760315
Because no sane company would try to compete against Intel/AMD and neither Intel/AMD would be crazy enough to jump architectures at this point.

>>55772814
A fucking $5 dollar Raspberry Pi is as good as K7 Athlon, don't kid yourself.

>>55772814
This is the most retarded post I've read all year.

congrats

>>55773046
then get the $35 pi

>>55773085
no u, faggit