ARM reveals 64-bit processor architecture

[Blackops_2]

Good news. About time a 3rd competitor came into play. Will be pretty interesting to see how performance stacks up when their first CPU is released.

It was just a matter of time, that ARM would announce a 64-bit architecture. ARM has made it official that a 64-bit architecture is coming, and the focus is on servers, but also retail where performance is in demand. ARM has been discussing implemented 64-bit support with its processors, but for several years nothing have been made official, until now. ARM says it is coming and that the new high-performance Cortex-A processor will be announced in 2012. The current architecture is code-named ARMv7 and sports technologies like TrustZone, virtualization and NEON SIMD. ARMv8 will support 64-bit (AArch64) instructions that will be fully compatible with 32-bit code (AArch32) and ARMv7. ARM is holding the details surrounding ARMv8, besides that it will run 64-bit code and target businesses and servers. ARM license partners already has access to the new architecture, and will start building up an eco system for it before it reaches the market. It will take some time before ARMv8 appeas though. Prototypes are slated for 2014, so it's not likely we will see system processors based on ARMv8 until 2016. ARM's plans have been well received by partners like Microsoft and NVIDIA, and the stock value was up 9.13% to 30.25 dollar after the announcement. We have no doubt that exciting times are before us as ARM improves performance and seriously starts to compete with the dominating x86 architecture in performance.

Source:Nordichardware

[Czarspuppet]

Their latest stuff puts bulldozer to shame in terms of scheduling a bunch of stuff different types of cores in one 'module'.

But let's see how the pipeline turns out.. They've been lengthening it unsustainably.

[CybrSlydr]

So... What does this mean for us gamers/desktop guys?

[Carozzeria]

Hopefully extremely low power gaming systems. I wonder if Adrena will be making the transition as well.

Something tells me that there is going to be an ARM console or two in the coming decade.

[krone6]

Originally Posted by CybrSlydr

So... What does this mean for us gamers/desktop guys?

No clue but i want an arm based file server!!!

[Carozzeria]

Get yourself an acorn a5k and you won't have to wait. Lol

[WordMasterRice]

Originally Posted by Blackops_2

Good news. About time a 3rd competitor came into play. Will be pretty interesting to see how performance stacks up when their first CPU is released.

2 Things, this is 2nd competitor, they are only competing with Intel.

They won't be able to compete for anything except maybe very niche stuff. We saw with Intel's latest architecture that you can't really compete in the server or workstation market with anything but x86.

Sure Windows 8 will be able to install on ARM, but there will be NO windows based ARM applications to run.

[Sephious]

Originally Posted by WordMasterRice

2 Things, this is 2nd competitor, they are only competing with Intel.

They won't be able to compete for anything except maybe very niche stuff. We saw with Intel's latest architecture that you can't really compete in the server or workstation market with anything but x86.

Sure Windows 8 will be able to install on ARM, but there will be NO windows based ARM applications to run.

Says who? Microsoft has always been about compatibility. I have no reason to believe that they're not going to make it easy to program for both x64 and ARM architectures at once.

[WordMasterRice]

Originally Posted by Sephious

Says who? Microsoft has always been about compatibility. I have no reason to believe that they're not going to make it easy to program for both x64 and ARM architectures at once.

How many native 64-bit apps are you using? And that is just an extension of x86, not even a new architecture.

Intel trying to create a new architecture before and it failed. If even Intel can't do it I'm not sure how ARM will compete.

[Czarspuppet]

The next generations will be marked by processors featuring several types of cores in a module. So don't be totally blown away if ARM tosses in a few x86 cores for backwards compatibility in lieu of an operating system designed for scheduling threads to very different cores.

[Josie Wales]

Cool. Looks like ARM is going to go head to head with the rest of the custom server processor crowd. It won't compete with high end processors like the IBM Z196 (5.2GHz stock) but might find a niche in the mainstream. I've noticed that many high end servers are now using a complex of task specific processors to assist the main core. The ARM architecture might work well in that environment.

[Maniac]

Originally Posted by Czarspuppet

The next generations will be marked by processors featuring several types of cores in a module. So don't be totally blown away if ARM tosses in a few x86 cores for backwards compatibility in lieu of an operating system designed for scheduling threads to very different cores.

ARM is not licensed to use the x86 instruction set afaik.

[Slizzo]

FWIW, Intel licenses the x86-64 tech from AMD who developed it.

Intel still has Itanium x64 processors, but you will only see them in the server market, and only in special cases.

Considering this is what you will likely see in MobileOSes, this could be a good thing though. Adoption of the tech may not be that big of a leap as it would be for desktop computing.

[Czarspuppet]

Originally Posted by WordMasterRice

How many native 64-bit apps are you using? And that is just an extension of x86, not even a new architecture.

Most of us use a 64 bit operating system app. That we run 32 bit inside of that is irrelevant, because at least the operating system can assign more memory.

[codegamer]

funny though that there are 32 bit OS's that can handle more than 4gb, MS just chose not to put it into their regular 32bit OS

(Before I get flamed, look at the 32bit Win Server 2k3 enterprise edition)

[Carozzeria]

They didn't put it into regular operating systems because people run processes that use more than two or three gigabytes of ram.

It would have been difficult to explain to a regular user that they can have access to over 4gb of ram but each of their programs is limited to 2gb. PAE is only commonly understood by power users.

[Maniac]

I've seen plenty of 32 bit games hit that 2 GB limit, more games need to switch to 64 bit... unfortunately only 45% of gamers have a 64 bit OS according to the Steam Hardware Survey.

[Nagoshi]

I hit the 2GB per program limit on my workstation daily. Way too many times.

[WordMasterRice]

Originally Posted by Czarspuppet

Most of us use a 64 bit operating system app. That we run 32 bit inside of that is irrelevant, because at least the operating system can assign more memory.

It's not irrelevant when you are talking about a fundamental hardware change. Developers don't even update their apps to use the 64 bit extensions of x86, why would they recompile and re-optimize the entire application to work on a new architecture.

A good example would be, how many programs were cross platform to the Mac before they switched to x86. When they were all PowerPC very little was crossplatform.

[Sephious]

Originally Posted by WordMasterRice

It's not irrelevant when you are talking about a fundamental hardware change. Developers don't even update their apps to use the 64 bit extensions of x86, why would they recompile and re-optimize the entire application to work on a new architecture.

A good example would be, how many programs were cross platform to the Mac before they switched to x86. When they were all PowerPC very little was crossplatform.

There's a difference between adding the 64-bit extension when it isn't going to add anything to your application, and allowing a whole new market to take advantage of it.

The biggest reason for nobody going cross-platform for PowerPC back then wasn't that it was too difficult, it was that nobody gave a **** about Apple back then.