Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: The Natural Philosopher Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: News : ARM Trying to Buy AmperComputing Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 11:18:26 +0000 Organization: A little, after lunch Lines: 26 Message-ID: References: <_hycnQxlN5kAphr6nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <36bf96a5-527c-1d8b-a93b-6788cdd589a2@example.net> <1PKcna3Yf6vdFhX6nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@earthlink.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2025 12:18:26 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1a7a5cff39e98a5f7b268f4906870c08"; logging-data="3662407"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+fOSZy/+yTGPL7Qyx8Std6v3mvf9cFKKI=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:RCUcCaYADrcBQCy2Qq5ViptXPsM= Content-Language: en-GB In-Reply-To: Bytes: 2215 On 16/01/2025 10:58, D wrote: > This is the truth! I've seen it in a few laptops. But I don't know if > they are energy efficient enough to make a huge difference. I get about > 14 hours or so from my 1.5 year old laptop. If arm would bump that to 25 > I'd seriously consider one! But last time I had a look, 1.5 years ago, > the battery time on arm laptops was far from impressive. There is some limit in terms of how much charge needs to get moved around how many transistors of at least a given size that relates ultimate MIPS per watt to a figure independent of architecture. The original ARM used very few transistors and an extremely well optimised instruction set to get the performance that it did at such low power. Arguably it is now in the same ballpark as a late model INTEL *86 or even RISC chip. -- "Strange as it seems, no amount of learning can cure stupidity, and higher education positively fortifies it." - Stephen Vizinczey