2015-07-21 1:57 GMT+02:00 Joel Rees <joel.r...@gmail.com>: > On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Christian Weisgerber > <na...@mips.inka.de> wrote: >> On 2015-07-17, BSD <b...@cpscoatings.net> wrote: >> >>> As a new user, I find myself in the same position as the OP: very >>> interested in non-Intel products. But there seems to be a vacuum of >>> information around this topic. >> >> You're 15 years too late. x86 has won. > > I know I'm persona non-grata on the list these days, and I doubt I'm > going to make much sense in an argument, but it's the way Intel won > that has some of use willing to take a small hit on performance or > price. > > Besides, it's only a small hit on much of what I do. RAM and hard disk > speed make up for quite a bit. >
I doubt anyone will argue about intel being cheaper and faster. But people might be interested in other thing. Power consumption come in my mind. That's one of the reason why most smartphone run on ARM and wikipedia claim the cell processor was used for making to most efficient server regarding floating operation per second versus power consumption. Another thing is to find bug. Each platform is different and some have already exposed bug which existed on x86 or amd64 but where harder to produce. Here is a metaphor. Intel produce hammer. Really nice hammer, work really well on nails, can also be used to stick a screw in wood. But sometimes, you aren't looking for a hammer. Cordialement, Coues Ludovic +336 148 743 42
