>30% longer battery lifex86 won. its over for ARM
>>102443230Yeah but the explosions are a deal breaker
>Hassan MujtabaGOOD MORNING SAAR
>>102443365He's a Paki tho: https://wccftech.com/author/hms/They look very similar, but pakis are hairier, darker, and with less public rape/zoophilia/scat and more incest/gayness/pedophilia in their lives.
>>102443230>look muhh nu CPU of last gen 900 mhz it has longer battery life.What did you expect if new CPU are similar to 90s cpu in power.
>>102443230That just means a battery volume reduction of 30% so the Jews can stuff the laptop chassis with high energy explosives to blow up any misbehaving goy
>>10244399530% longer battery, 30% more tnt
>>102443289>>102443995>>102444066meds
>>102444086Yes, the Israelis are mediterranean What of it?
>>102444086It's only a matter of time before intelaviv starts blowing up racists. Best hang on to those old thinkpads.
>>102443230>Nu IntelWhen can I buy one? I was hoping to gift one to an adversary of mine, in Minecraft of course.
why are they competing with outdated technology? apple is upgrading everything to M4 as we speak
>>102443230probably lag as fuck like running cpu at 0.5ghzunusable for daily .
>>102443230does it explode too
>>102443230ARM already was doomed to failure because you can't just emulate x86 and get the same performance.I'm not defending CISC but you can't expect instructions performed in software to somehow perform better than instructions built into hardware while maintaining the same level of battery life ARM claims. Literal physics prevents this, it's not something you can just hope that a faster ARM processor would resolve.Don't get me wrong; I fucking hate x86/64. The sooner we can drop them the better. But marketers went the wrong fucking way with this and retards here and elsewhere lapped up that slop like it was truth.I even pointed out several dozen times that Intel's just gonna spit out a chip that has better power management because /they haven't even tried to do so yet/.For years they didn't do it because it wasn't an avenue anyone cared about until recently. Nobody expected laptops to last more than 4-6 hours, let alone 18 so why would they try? All they needed to focus on was being on top of the chart with AMD below them.Now that battery and power is something that matters (probably one of the only good things besides medical stuff to come from AI tbist of desus; those power hogs are a problem to be solved—) they can do the bare minimum with a minor cut to performance and end up coming out on top.I doubt real world battery and performance will hit 30% but I can tell you that its at least the very beginning.
>>102444326TL;DR and you are a retard
>>102444326actually, I would like to know. how much do you get for shilling? or do you simply hodl and have nothing better to do than to invent shit for coping? if you are a troll, then I salute you. this is the most retarded post I've read in a long time.
>>102443230I think I prefer small batteries now
>>102444217The same is true for video rundown on a Macbook. The 20+ hour battery lives are fantasy if you run say Teams for a bit.
>>102444187>why are they competing with outdated technology? apple is upgrading everything to M4 as we speakYou said it yourself. Apple is upgrading everything as we speak. Meaning it's not on everything. What the fuck are people going to do? Benchmark desktop/laptop stuff against the iPad? lmao there's no comparison to be had there, dumbass.
>>102443289fpbp
>>102445010was that a fart? I can taste it. ketchup and onion.
>>102443230Now I read these battery specs as>30% more explody if Israel wants it to be
>>102445065YO YO YO, B-BOY SNAKE DAWG /g/
>>102443230iTODDLERS BTFO
>>102443230This entire x86 vs arm flame war is retarded. Instruction sets are not primarily responsible for performance and efficiency. They have some impact, and longer and more specialized instructions can have advantages, but so do shorter instructions especially related to pipelining.In the end it's actually a form of convergent "evolution" (or rather design) where the middle ground is used in the end. Risc ISAs obviously have a simpler and less bloated set of instructions, which makes them easier to adopt, manage and thus they are intrinsically more secure as there are just less instructions to fuck up in the implementation, but x86 and especially x86_64 have such a prominent position in computing that the arm has a hard time competing, as it has no significant upside (but it has definitely advantages, just no significant ones).Arm is perceived as more efficient because the architecture was and still is primarily focused on low power designs, while x86_64 CPUs are often used with a 10 tikes higher power budget, hence that's the range they're designed for. But there's obviously nothing stopping Intel and AMD from adjusting their designs to target this low power market segment, and that is precisely what they've done in the last couple of years. Conversely, that also means that arm designs could target 65 & 105W and properly compete with x86 in that segment, but as these parts are increasingly more fore "power users" it will still require a lot of software adaptation to be a valid alternative.Still, I don't see a future where arm can truly beat x86, all they can do is match but just have the 2nd tier IS, which is always going to be an issue.Personally, I hope for China to push risc-v, they can escape the licensing issues of x86 and arm and we could enjoy an open is.
>>102445860okay, let's assume you are a Chinese RISC-V shill. instead of shilling and getting on every ones nerves here, please improve the ecosystem and make SBCs with fully functioning hardware support. with enough performance to shitpost on 4chan and watch webms in Linux. and I mean open source drivers for every fucking thing on that board. then maybe we will adopt your shit. otherwise, please, kindly, fuck off.
>>102443289>t. curryniggerbook cuck
