Windows native on ARM + Emulated x86

>>61218640
Desktop class ARM CPUs when?

the botnet expands

but can it run crysis?

>shilling for angry birds processor

This board wasn't always like this

>Qualcomm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7qTHbOEiDY
Nice keks

File: technology.jpg (16KB, 364x159px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 364x159px

>>61218783
>having threads discussion about technology is now "shills"
Wew

>>61218688
3way desktop cpu competition for consumers would be great.

>>61218783
You're right, I miss the days when people just yelled housefire and called each other fags instead of talking about new technologies.

>>61218688
Until it gets 64-bit & 32 bits support.
Intel might sue them for the x86 emulation.>>61218688

>>61218836
top kek thank you anon

>View from a Blue Moon trailer
>runs really smoothly
Stutters and drops frame first 5 secs.
>Panning a still in a game
>2 sec radial blur
Probably runs like shit. ARM doesn't scale up well. Why even bother with emulation when ARM cores are weaker than x86 ones? And no fuck off with your crypto-Geekbench graphs.
>only works for x86, not x86-64
DOA. Emulation also means software accel up the ass. No hardware accel will mean piss poor performance and battery life.

>>61218640
>windows

>>61218720
you realize that the Nvidia Tegra X1 is an ARM chip that can give near Xbox 360 performance, and Crysis 3 was on the Xbox 360. So it's possible for an ARM based chip to run Crysis 3 if you match or go a little below the settings used for the Xbox 360 version.

File: 19510152_1907633962810425_2593119993360112916_n.png (106KB, 480x529px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 480x529px

>>61218917
>Intel invented the amd64 architecture

>>61218640
>posting a video from 6 months ago
>lags in the menu of a phone game

>>61219381
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSXUDKpkbx4

>>61219373
Intel will sue for x86 emulation not x64 https://www.techspot.com/news/69649-intel-hints-microsoft-qualcomm-windows-10arm-x86-emulation.html
>"There have been reports that some companies may try to emulate Intel's proprietary x86 ISA without Intel's authorization," writes chief lawyer Stephen Rodgers and Intel Labs Director Richard A. Uhlig. "We do not welcome unlawful infringement of our patents, and we fully expect other companies to continue to respect Intel's intellectual property rights."
>The blog post also states: "Intel carefully protects its x86 innovations, and we do not widely license others to use them."

>>61219072
>le rebbit bogeyman
Not an argument.

File: 149703614272.png (509KB, 454x642px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 454x642px

>>61218917
>Intel sues microsoft

>>61219465
They know they'll lose. This is just Intel getting all flustered after seeing Epyc and Windows on ARM in the same year.

>>61219465
Isn't Intel using emulation of ARM to run Android?

>>61218640
> intel legal on suing watch

>>61219432
>6 month old video
>literally everything soldered
if its cheap enough it can replace office computers though

>>61219524
AOSP can be compiled and run on anything, dumbass.

>>61219471
**Tipping intensifies**

>>61218995
Their emulation is more like recompiling the entire binary to ARM code. It's a lot more advanced. https://venturebeat.com/2017/05/11/watch-windows-10-running-on-arm-with-full-support-for-existing-win32-apps/

File: dud.png (31KB, 195x180px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 195x180px

>>61220352
>WOW Abstraction Layer

File: tmp_25008-1497305508223712552069.jpg (134KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 1280x720px

Q E M U
E
M
U

>>61220435
Qemu and anything emulating x86 is illegal now apparently -Intel

>>61220352
>still has to emulate all the DLLs and the fucking app itself
in other words the OS will run fine but anything you install will run like dogshit

>>61220352
Why don't they port everything natively to Arm instead?

>>61221321
it's not the 1990s anymore, you would barely notice a difference in speed

>>61221321
It recompiles the binary to ARM code and stores it locally, similar to how ART on Android works. It is not straight up slow interpreted emulation.

You know what uses less energy than emulated x86? Running x86 natively.

>>61221416
Everything is already going to be native ARM except the x86 programs you decide to run on it.

>>61221416

Because most applications are no longer under active development and will thus never be ported to any other architecture.

>>61218640
>Will this lead to lowcost and better battery life for laptops?
not when you're running heavy-ass windows software in a fucking emulator

when will you faggots stop living in the '90s and move on from the Windows on RISC delusion like the rest of us who lived through it the first time did

>>61221568
Everything is going to be native ARM, except x86 programs you install yourself.

Unless you're saying Windows itself is so bloated/unoptimized that it sucks even when recompiled natively to ARM.

File: 140wmyass.png (26KB, 711x533px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 711x533px

>>61219465
since when has emulation been illegal?
and from what I gather microsoft is translating compiled applications in software, it's not some special hardware for it. So this isn't even emulation more like a JIT compiler.
I just see no basis for any lawsuit from intel.

>>61221607
>Everything is going to be native ARM, except the software you're actually going to run on it
NT ports to other platforms never flopped because of NT itself, they flopped because the entire point of Windows was running those x86 programs and the NT ports ran them like hot garbage

>>61221804
You know modern software that's still being updated can just be compiled natively for ARM, right? I'd be really surprised if you couldn't get Firefox and Chromium for ARM on Windows.

Only old, outdated legacy x86 software that's no longer being updated or supported will never get a native ARM version.

>>61221804
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRBMBkL7SCM
>INB4 Pajeet

>>61219560
Yes, but not every app is so Intel invented an emulation system for Android on x86 based processors to run ARM apps on the processor. They called it Houdini.

>>61221848
>but you can just port it!
That was the case the last three times NT was on a non-x86 platform too, yet all of those efforts were utter non-events despite the industry fanfare. Really makes you think, doesn't it? Firefox and Chromium are built with multi-platform support in mind, it isn't always that easy or worth the effort in other cases, especially when these Windows 10 ARM devices are guaranteed to be low-end facebook machine trash to begin with.
>>61221865
I don't understand what this is supposed to prove, except for maybe RT pretty much every mainstream Windows port to another architecture has had seamless x86 emulation, which is the problem, because emulation on all but the most tightly controlled platforms is always shit.

What's exciting about this if it works is to see how Intel will compete with Qualcomm.

>>61222284
Threaten more lawsuits

>>61218688
K12 is coming for server and embedded markets, possibly a variant is being worked for desktop and laptop markets.

>>61222284
Microsoft wanted to have UWP and desktop apps work on mobile devices, including phones. Intel was originally going to supply mobile processors, but pulled out. Then MS then went to Intel's competitor, and the ONLY game in town for this purpose, ARM, to emulate it. Intel is now crying about it so they won't compete.

File: 1481210841402.jpg (149KB, 1020x1000px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1020x1000px

>high-performance non-botnet shit soon

>>61219465
Fucking hilarious.
Qualcomm and Microsoft are much bigger than Intel are.
Now that AMD has the performance crown and Qualcomm has the price and efficiency crown, Intel has nowhere to go.

>>61221568
Windows 10 is a heck of a lot lighter than Android these days.

>>61223688
My shitty $70 windows 10 tablet runs like shit. My shitty $65 android tablet runs reasonably.

>>61223666
At least they still got "muh clocks" 4 cores.

File: 1499217003074.jpg (148KB, 925x1032px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 925x1032px

>>61220435
>tfw botnet gets something that GNU/Linux had for years

>>61223704
Opposite for me. I got a HP Stream 7 and a Alcatel Pop 5 phone, both 1GB, both perform similarly in CPU tests.

The Windows tablet holds 5-7 tabs fine in Edge. The phone however barely can run 1 at a time, 2 tabs in Chrome is all it can do.
Android is a fucking joke.

>>61218995
Windows 64 already emulate 32bit code

>>61223737
The phone is far more susceptible to thermal throttling and probably has significantly less RAM, which would explain the tab issues.

I have a NuVision tablet that was on sale from the Microsoft Store. The thing had atrocious eMMC storage, took 30 seconds to launch edge, and stuttered on 1080p YouTube videos. My RCA tablet from Walmart launches Chrome close-to-instantly and doesn't stutter with videos. Both have 2GB of RAM.

>>61224195
Both 1GB RAM. Yeah, I think eMMC speeds are the Saving grace of the Stream 7, 250MB R/170MB W, makes swapping a lot more bearable.

>>61218640
How much is Intel going to sue Microsoft for?

>>61223666
Microsoft, yes.
Qualcomm is half the size of Intel though by market cap.

>>61218836
FFFUUUUEEEEEEEEEEEGGGGGOOOOO

So, they will release a RT version for all those with 8.1 RT, even without the x86 emulation?

File: ohNoes.gif (4MB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 600x600px

>>61223180
>non-botnet
Now, don't be too optimistic.

>>61219465
Emulation isn't illegal though. It has been upheld in court several times in the US which is the most ass-backwards country in regards to technology.

>>61221472
>>>61221321
>it's not the 1990s anymore, you would barely notice a difference in speed
This is a load of horse shit and you know it.

>>61223757
It does but not the hardware. The OS emulates the 32bit ABIs and APIs that software runs on. Think WINE rather than QEMU.

>>61224451
>US which is the most ass-backwards country in regards to technology.
Then there's this fucking retard. Although Trump is taking it down a notch.

File: NSA-Windows_2015-07-22_04.png (3MB, 2560x1600px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2560x1600px

>>61218640
>Will this lead to
> another microsoft clusterfuck?

Yes. The answer is always yes.

How can (you) know?, (you) might ask.

IF
[x] is microsoft involved ?

THEN
[x] it's already a clusterfuck
[x] very soon it will be an even bigger clusterfuck

>>61224585
Software patents, not a thing in most of the world.

Copyright infringement for personal use is not an offense in most countries. US is responsible for copyright terms being 70+ years in the first place.

DMCA, restricts a persons ability to tinker with their own device or vehicle because breaking DRM is a crime. Also hinders security researchers from being able to examine things for bugs which can lead to serious problems being left unaddressed.

>>61224714
They're not really backwards if they bring down the world with them.

I think they just banned me for shitposting ITT

File: 1434385618635.jpg (17KB, 217x320px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 217x320px

>>61224642
>meme only have 1 (you)
>still force it
Here have 1 more (you)

>>61222412
>Intel was originally going to supply mobile processors, but pulled out. Then MS then went to Intel's competitor
Refuse to make mobile processors for new gen PC, dragging the industry down with them. And now they want to sue Microsoft and Qualcomm? Fucking jews.

>>61220178
>Their emulation is more like recompiling the entire binary to ARM code. It's a lot more advanced.
He really seriously actually fucking believes the marketing bullshit.
Every. Fucking. Time.

>>61227261
If FOSS Dolphin comes with a dynamic recompiler for powerpc->x86 binaries, then surely Microsoft can make one for x86_32->arm.

>>61227318
Dude, modern x86 processors are massively more powerful than the powerpc chips in Nintendo's gaming consoles. Conversely, the Snapdragon 835 is significantly slower than the slowest Core chip it will be trying to emulate the instruction set of. Even at maximum efficiency which is impossible, an sd835 powered, x86 emulating device, will be like using a Core m3 powered laptop at half speed. The thought is laughable. Fucking DOA, my dude.

>>61219352
fucking oats for brains here

>>61224774
>force countries to accept their shitty copyright laws in order to be part of a trade agreement in return

Useless since there is no software.

And the CPU is probably worse and more expensive than a atom

>>61227451
cont. So any x86 emulation is going to be really bad.

Good. It should be good enough for normie netbooks. They wouldn't need performance that much in the first place.

>>61227451
>>61227451
>Useless since there is no software
The point of this is emulate legacy software, if not for that they'll just use Windows RT
>And the CPU is probably worse and more expensive than a atom
And? Intel basically gave up on atom, manufacturers have to find other way

>>61227497
>Good. It should be good enough for normie netbooks.
But it won't be though.

i just want a quad core pentium 4

>>61227506
What normie task demands more?

>>61224445
he doesn't know about ARM TrustZone (TM)

>>61227541
Overall browser responsiveness especially loading the mountain of JavaScript ads on the modern web. Anything short of a Core m3 on a desktop/laptop type device running a non-mobile browser will choke. It will get a bad reputation and consumers will flee.

>>61227511
yeah, 4 pentiums should be right enough to burn your house

>>61227645
They wouldn't notice it with slow interbutt. Also, there would be ARM versions of major browers.

So it's a worse chromebook but with the ability to (slowly) run light x86 applications? This will also probably be way overpriced.


>>61227690
>They wouldn't notice it with slow interbutt.
Normies are at least decent at detecting slow browsing.

>there would be ARM versions of major browers. [citation needed]
It'll be MS edge only, the majors browsers will only port their stuff if this gets big, which it probably wont.

>>61227500
>And?
That means it's just worse than existing products.
>Intel basically gave up on atom, manufacturers have to find other way
They still sell atoms, and still make new celereons for all the chromebooks.

>>61227767
>>This will also probably be way overpriced.

They would be cheap if MS introduces it as a Chromebook killer.

>>61227876
Then they would have to drop down to a lower end ARM chip.

>>61227976
Or bargain sale like Atom for Android.

>>61227767
>overpriced
Snapdragon cost around 20-40 dollars

File: 1497565895125.jpg (112KB, 691x771px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 691x771px

>>61218640
DELETE THIS YOU STUPID GOY