Expect the First Windows 8 Snapdragon PC Late 2012

Whaaaaaat the... who the hell will be dumb enough to get a DESKTOP based on ARM?!

Tell you what, we had this Atom craze in the town starting 3 years back or so and it only stopped now. After countless board failures, RMAs and miserable user experience, I think it's safe to mock anyone who gets a low-power desktop for home use. Get real and get some good quality fast CPU... Intel Sandy Bridge Pentiums will do, just got 3 of them recently and they're great for low-budget builds.

I have to ask this...but seriously...WILL it be able to run Crysis? I honestly want to know what kind of power this thing will have.

Plain stupid, sorry to say. ARM is ARM; Crysis needs a good dual/quad core x86 to run acceptably.

ARM just stay out of Intel and AMD way, because an idiot would just think of buying ARM cpu for a desktop.
I think I will just throw an egg at the one who said that smartphones control other markets, well you are blind.

applied micro has a slide showing the relative computational power of armv8 (yeah, that's 2015ish hardware, except their dev boards that come march 2012 - dont ask) relative to sandy bridge. if you calculate what the lines would be like for ivy bridge and haswell as 1/3 better than the previous generation ( a 33% improvement overall seems reasonable if slightly accelerated), than a 128-core armv8 will com in around 95% of the computational power of a haswell part based on the high end i7 SNB today. It will also require up to 256watts to run, being about 3 times as power hungry.
these qualcomm chips are going to ring in around the level of a15s. maybe a bit more, maybe a bit less, but certainly around that level (same instruction set, same die size). Assume the same 1/3 improvement again for arm from a15s to armv8, then the qualcomm needs 128 cores to compare to ivy bridge. No one is going to make 128 core desktops, the workload isnt threaded enough. So these are going to suck unless they are *dirt* cheap.

In a way i'm happy to see a arm solution enter the desktop arena, that way some people will open their blinded eyes that ghz and the number of cores are far from only measure of cpu performance. Some peeps are in for a cold shower believing arm is "superior" to the SB for instance.

Arm has its good uses in hardware like phones, pads and small electronics as those platforms is either power limited or run on a money strict budget and thats where the arm architecture shines. However when it comes to anything remotely demanding its no secret the manfacturers all of a sudden have to add dedicated hardware logic (either on die or external) due to the lack of performance rather than do it in software (decoding/endocing ect) like any normal desktop.

In other words, both sides had their pro's and con's and both shine in their own ways - Don't try to blur that line today too much as it will end up badly. (Atom in phones with their power hunger (might change with 3dgate) or this - arm cpu in a desktop).

My 2 cents!

I don't think there is such a thing as DirectX 9.3. Is that supposed to be DirectX 9.0c?

"Naturally the big issue ARM-based PCs will face is the inability to run older Windows 7 or XP software. "

This means failed, we don't need a version of Windows 8 that's not backward compatible...
I can already hear my friends asking me in the future, "why don't my windows open this ? I use to be able to run it in windows 7/xp!".

why would anyone want a desktop with a smartphones hardware? you might as well put a VGA port in my phone and hook up a shitty monitor to it. And now they're saying people want to use "Apps" on a desktop? are you kidding me? there's a reason I'm using my desktop and not my phone right now..and no, its not just for the bigger display. I pity the moron who would ever buy an ARM-based desktop..

+1 I resent any processor not being able to run / benchmark Crysis.

The Qualcomm people are ignorant as all hell. No one wants just phone stuff for their PCs or they would ditch the PCs and just use their phones. Those systems may not be available until very late in 2012 or early 2013... just in time to compete with Intel's Haswell running a mature 22nm process and no doubt significant performance gains in graphics and compute power as well as gains in power management. Those systems could very well run in the same power envelope as a lower power Haswell type system buth with a 10th of the performance. You add in compatability issues and you would have to give them away to get any use out of them. I'm thinking both Intel and AMD will fry those things pretty good.

Actually, the more interesting battle is how much headway Intel can make on the smartphone and tablet platform with its next generation ATOM, but that isn't expected to hit the shelves until 2013. I think that architecture has a chance to really make some noise moreso than current ARM chips running PC hardware.

Hmmm... A HTPC with snapdragon would be nice, if there will be program support for it... but how can it manage against ivybridge? ... There is a long way to go suitable program and driver support for those ARM prosessors. Otherwice, there is very little that these can do in desktop market... Fileserver? HTPC? not much more...

I think many of you are underestimating the power of familiarity. I have users that know more about smart phones and apps then I do (i have a feature phone), but have to have a 10min tutorial on what the phrase "restart your pc" means (its sad how often that happens).

Phones are disposable and by the time you're contract is up there is the latest and greatest advancement for the same contract price as your last phone. So as smart phones came down in price the number of people of all technical backgrounds started buying them because every new phone is better and better right? This process has made people comfortable with smart phones and how they work, extending what people are comfortable with to the PC makes all the more sense.

Patrons of this site jumped into PC hardware at various stages we cut our teeth in DOS and Windows 3.1 we understand and build systems and software, and the phone OS is silly to us. However, we're going to be the dinosaurs who fail to realize the potential of a new platform because the old way is familiar or "the best way" to us. I liken it to Apple realizing the potential of the mouse when xerox thought it was just a toy, a gimmick. I'm sure all the guys who watched Jobs make it an integrable part of his system said: "I pity the person who buys a machine with that thing". And now only the hard core "X" hating lunix man shuns a mouse.

Change will come no matter what has worked in the past. Refusing to accept the inevitable tide of technological overture is a ridiculous parade of both pride and fear that tramples those unable or unwilling to adapt.

I highly doubt that ARM based desktops (mind you we are talking about formfactor here, ARM based PC can't exist) can be success because people want same experience on their desktop as on their phones. This concept can work for business users, especially as clerk's and business assistants' workstations where it's only needed for office applications and or sending emails. In cases where extremely low performing ARM does same thing as efficiently as much expensive AMD or Intel CPU with IGP, but costs much less and consumes much less power, thus cutting bills. Mind you, I'm not talking about companies that have 10s of computers, but that have 1000s, and 1000s of clerks that do quite dumb work of writing memos and doing spreadsheets all day long.

So what is the point? If it is a laptop or ultrabook form-factor then get one that uses an X86 CPU and run all your software, and seeing as there is a program that will allow running Android Apps then ARM needs to do a bit more work, sign a few deals and get itself an X86 license.

I think arm/windows 8 setups will be perfect for netbooks. The low power nature of arm chips should mean smaller battery packs and no need for the heatsink and fan built into current laptops. Think ultrabooks but for the price of a netbook.

I think there is definitely a market for these guys for people that want ultra portable and just do productivity, web browsing, and email. Make it significantly cheaper than ultra books and they should sell like crazy. By the way people that use computers like I described use a very smaller number of programs so not being able to run x86 based programs is probably no big deal. I wonder if there are plans for a google chrome arm based netbook.

A cloud based ultrabook is the market for this, arm should be working with Google to port Chrome OS.

do they cost well under 50$ per cpu?
i can see an arm being a great cpu for people who just wordprocess, email, and web browse, and want to do that for cheap.




arm can do some things really well, and those some things, is what most people only care about. that said, you could see a quad arm system, i mean arm barely need a heat sync, and if they are small enough you could get a 16 core computer, and per process, how much slower are arm to an intel, disregarding threads entirely.




isnt windows 8 suppose to be able to take a single thread applications and force it multithread? i heard that somewhere... at the very least, i can say this, i could use 128 cores, give each process its own core, and have at it, i currently have 87 shareing 4 cores.




it also means easily ported apps, and everything big will most likely be written for the two anyway.




with windows 8, apps are going to change, because they arent only for the phone or tablet anymore.




a complete arm desktop could probably play 1080p video for less than 200$
can you say the same about a 200$ intel computer, or even build one for that little?

most people couldnt care less about how fast their pc is because we hit the point were even the worst you can buy has enough power for most people. its on to a battle of cost, and arm could really change things on the low end, and possibly the high end, if they allow multi cpu systems.




for buisnesses... it will be the defacto standard soon, the low power, and mixed with the ecencials like word and crap going to arm, its possible that this will take of there before the desktop segment

what a niche.

A Power user would NEVER buy a ARM computer as their main computer. Too much software written in x86 that won't be written for ARM anytime soon. Besides, I suspect ARM is dog slow compared to an Ivy Bridge or Piledriver with a good GPU..
Second what amdwilliam1985 said, why would I buy a computer that can't run all the software I already have??

"Snapdragon-based desktop" would've been two words that no one ever would have put one after another just a year ago. I have hopes for the next year.

The battlefield is getting broader, ope it will translate to lower hardware prices, the problem is M$ will again have monopoly over software.

I can't wait for the Nokia Windows 8 tablet. I'm so sick of Apple and Android, they are made for geeks.

Apple made for geeks? Get your info straight!




I hope they will. Their monopoly totally rocks so far!

a complete arm desktop could probably play 1080p video for less than 200$
can you say the same about a 200$ intel computer, or even build one for that little?

A windows 8 license will be $100+. Will this mystical ARM PC come in at

Challenge accepted:
Cart Item List:
Qty. Product Description Savings Total Price
1
Foxconn AHD1S-K AMD E-350 APU (1.6GHz, Dual-Core) Mini ITX Motherboard/CPU Combo
Item #:N82E16813186212
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy
$119.99
$84.99
1
G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 4GB 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1066 (PC3 8500) Desktop Memory
Item #:N82E16820231307
Return Policy: Memory Standard Return Policy
$20.99
1
APEX Black DM-318 Micro ATX Media Center / HTPC Case
Item #:N82E16811154062
Return Policy: Standard Return Policy
$49.99
$40.00
1
Patriot Torqx 2 PT232GS25SSDR 2.5" Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)
Item #:N82E16820220580
Return Policy: Limited Replacement Only Return Policy
$99.99
$69.99
Grand Total: $215.97


P.S. There's a $25 mail in rebate on that SSD.

The point is to have ARM based tablets running Windows 8 metro apps, and the same apps running on Windows 8 Intel desktops. Same code base. Eventually, the same apps running on Windows 8 phones, same code base. Think about it.

*facepalm* DO NOT. MENTION. crAPPS ON A DESKTOP!!!!!!! *rage*

@robisinho

Your numbers are a little off. Some more detail are explained below. A quad core Snapdragon S4 will be about twice as fast as a C2D T7200 and the newest Core i7-3960X will be probably about 10-12X faster (3x as many core times about double the clock speed times about 1.5 to 1.8 for larger cache, hyper-threading and microcode improvements = 10x to 12x). So optimistically it will take about 5-6 of the quad core S4 “modules” clocked at @2.5 Ghz to equal the processing power of an Core i7-3960X. Less be pessimistic and assume it take 12 quad core “modules” at 5w each and you get ~60 Watts

Now for the background

I am interested in buying a Trim Slice built by CompuLabs so I have done a lot of research into the Tegra 2 and now Tegra 3 platform. A Tegra 2 will run Netbook Ubuntu without a problem (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GJsy7FEPak). So by extension I assume Windows 8 will run as well if not better than a beta Ubuntu. The Tegra 3 runs at about 85-90% of a C2D T7200 via benchmarks. A recent article on SemiAccurate says the Tegra 3 implementation sucks (http://semiaccurate.com/2011/11/09/tegra-3-missed-performance-goals-by-wide-margins/) and other sources say the Snapdragons ARM is 30-40% more effective than a stock ARM9 implementation that Nvidia uses. The new Snapdragons if clocked at 2.5 compared to the Tegra 3 ~1.3 Ghz will be twice as fast. Net effect that a quad core Snapdragon will run about twice as fast as a Intel C2D T7200. I will say that the graphics of the Snapdragon will be most likely below that of the Sandy Bridge or maybe even Pentium integrated graphics (unless Qualcomm upgrades it heavily). The point of the Trim Slice is a good enough web surfing machine and always on personal file servers consuming ~5 watts.

What I notice in these post, is people are looking at this from the GAMER perspective. A mentality of
a Sandy Bridge (preferably Sandy Bridge-E ) or nothing. You would be surprised that many people are running Quad Core 2's, C2D's or even Athlon dual core systems. I personally will upgrade my gaming system to a SB-E or AMD based Piledriver (next gen Bulldozer chip) with a AMD HD 7000 series graphics card in the next few months. My parents by comparison need no such processing power (same goes for 75% of PC users). They surf the web, play flash games, do some simple picture editing, and some word processing. The Snapdragon will work well enough for them. Keep in mind that my gaming rig uses ~150 Watts while surfing and the Snapdragon Desktop system will more that likely come in at about 20W if not less (5-6W for CPU, 2-4W Ram. 4 w HDD, 6-9 other integrated IC's and power supply inefficiencies). Also keep in mind that a ARM based system will more than like be even cheaper than any Atom around today and more than likely silent.

As apps or applications go for an entry level ARM (or Intel) based PC, a web browser, an office suite, some image editing software, maybe some other media editing support and maybe flash support is needed. For the entry level users this is not a high barrier to entry. MS is probably working on a Office port for ARM and other applications can easily be recompiled such as web browsers for the ARM architecture. If you want to do 3D Max, Maya, or Photoshop creation then get a x86 machine preferably with a higher end professional card.

So in summary if you want to an entry level PC for most users an ARM or x86 will be adequate. If you want some entry level gaming go AMD Fusion, for content creation and hardcore gaming going SB and dedicated graphics.

No $h!t. This is an enthusiast website (yes, this is NOT Tom's Guide!), deal with it.

These "cheap entry level desktops" end up in people cursing at how "slow" Windows is and dragging their PC to service because they think something is wrong with it; read the first comment in this thread.

Core 2 Quad isn't weak, neither is C2D, you can game with this no problem. C2D or i3 or Pentium Sandy Bridge is a bare minimum for today desktop/laptop software and there's no need to go lower, it's all good.

What I was referring to is the ATTITUDE of the people posting here. You just helped underline this problem and attitude.

I am well aware of Tom's and it's target audience. I have been reading this website since circa 1999/2000. To put this in perspective I remember reading reviews of the Pentium III 800 mhz on Tom's. I have been on this site at least once a week (usually more) reading articles since 1999/2000. The first system I put together thanks to the reviews was a Athlon 2000+ (can no longer remember if it was an XP branded processor), Corsair XMMS memory, Abit Mobo, Ati 8500 and raided IBM 60 GB HDD's. Though the enthusiast nature of Tom's is not 100% correct, since CPU and GPU roundups articles are more mainstream oriented as are the how-to for system building and Wifi.

Unlike some of the users on this website you managed to post some relevant information. What I assume you are unaware of is that Windows 7 has approximately the same requirements (responsiveness) as XP and Windows 8 preliminary benchmarks put Windows 8 at or below the requirements of Windows 7. If you read http://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] ,2069.html , a C2D E7200 (2x2.33 GHZ) vs Atom (1 x 1,6Ghz) is compared or 4.66 vs 1.6 Ghz. The article further points out the C2D is 4-6 times faster than a single core Atom. If you read http://www.slideshare.net/napolean [...] omparisons , then you will see that clock of clock (scroll to close to the end of the article) in many tests an ARM8 architecture is clock for clock as fast as an Atom. Now the A9 in the next generation after A8 and the Krait (Snapdragon S4) in the next generation after A9 so there will be architectural improvements of two generations that even further increase performance. Read http://www.anandtech.com/show/4940 [...] itecture/1 for some background.

So a quad core S4 @ 2.5Ghz (about 10 Ghz of performance) vs Atom 230 (1.6 Ghz). The S4 is about about 6.25 times as fast as the Atom (10/1.6 Ghz). Then take into account improvements of performance caused by two generations of ARM development (maybe add a 60% or more performance gain). Windows8 has improved thread balancing/loading so most of the 10Ghz (if not all) should be utilized. So the Qualcomm chip could perform on par or exceed the performance of a C2D E7200. The reason I used a C2D E7200 rather than the C2D T7200 (mobile CPU) mentioned earlier is that I have harder number for it and it is a desktop part. The E7200 is also faster.

By your own admission a C2D is ok for most users so this chip will most likely live up to the needs of casual Windows 8 users. My request you do a little more research before posting (I could add more but I am refraining). Who is ultimately right will be shown when the device ships and side by side comparisons are done. I will admit that the graphics may be below par unless this is upgraded before launch.

PS: The email account associated with TH is a ternary email account so I check it less frequently and I just notice your response.