Expect the First Windows 8 Snapdragon PC Late 2012
Expect to see Snapdragon-based desktops running Windows 8 on the market this time next year.
Qualcomm CEO Paul Jacobs, speaking during the San Diego semiconductor company's annual analyst day in New York, said Qualcomm is currently working with Microsoft to ensure that the upcoming Windows 8 operating system will run on its ARM-based Snapdragon SoCs. Currently he expects to see the majority of Windows 8-based products to launch after the end of fiscal 2012 which ends in September of next year. That said, Snapdragon-powered Windows 8 desktops and notebooks are expected hit the market around the same time.
During the event, Qualcomm COO Steve Mollenkopf added that Snapdragon PCs will have an edge over Windows 8 solutions provided by AMD and Intel because people mostly want the same features they love on their smartphones and tablets on their desktops and laptops. To some degree, he makes a good point, as major companies like Google, Intel, Toshiba and many others are working to bridge the portable and desktop together by integrating the "app experience" into the desktop and laptop.
"What developers are looking for will be dominated by what's happening on the phone," said Mollenkopf. "The phone itself will be the center of attention for developers. And then they'll say how can they adapt that for the car and home. It's much easier to go after the market if you have leadership in smartphones."
Naturally the big issue ARM-based PCs will face is the inability to run older Windows 7 or XP software. Windows Team boss Steven Sinofsky said earlier this year that "we've been very clear since the very first CES demos and forward that the ARM product won't run any x86 applications." But Mollenkopf said this won't really be an issue, as the key applications will be re-written for the ARM architecture. Many other popular programs are already running in the cloud and can be accessed through an Internet browser.
"For the apps that you really care about, I don't see it as a significant growth inhibitor in terms of ARM vs. Windows," he said. "I don't think the impact is as significant as what others believe."
On Wednesday the company also said that its upcoming 28-nm quad-core Snapdragon chips will initially appear in tablets in the second half of next year. These will be part of Qualcomm's Snapdragon S4 product line that also includes single-core and dual-core solutions. The S4 chips are designed to run Windows 8, and includes an integrated 3G and 4G modem. Clock speeds run between 1.5 GHz and 2.5 GHz, and the chip's Adreno graphics core will support DirectX 9.3.
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.
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.
Plain stupid, sorry to say. ARM is ARM; Crysis needs a good dual/quad core x86 to run acceptably.
I think I will just throw an egg at the one who said that smartphones control other markets, well you are blind.
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.
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?
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!".
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.
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.
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 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.
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
Second what amdwilliam1985 said, why would I buy a computer that can't run all the software I already have??