Hell, even Rock chip is making real progress ar this point. The new RK series SoCs have some legitimately impressive performance compared to previous generations.
Aside from Nvidia & Apple they're literally the only ARM company that makes PC-level ARM chips. The big Snapdragon 9 Gen 1 ain't coming until 2024, but don't expect RTX 3080 level of performance from them
Mediacom could be a player too. And I think if the focus early on would be energy efficient Windows laptops that could compete with the M1 Air in terms of price (half the price, a little slower, but similar battery life at least), Microsoft could maybe take that edge they don't get as much with cheaper Celeron/Atom laptops.
I bought an RT when they released and really liked it, but it was certainly limited due to lack of developer support. Sadly, the same thing happened to the Windows phone, which I also really liked.
The absolute worst part about this is that I see it being achievable unlike some of the pie in the sky ambitions they have sometimes. Fantastic video and a great breakdown
I don't see why they'd bother to dothis. They can just sit and as long as devs don't care about Mac (which is most of the time), Intel and AMD wouldn't switch and they'd keep minting money. This is something that s not happening that Apple fans (myself inluded) insist is happening: there is no ARM revolution.
Windows on ARM has came a long way since it was originally introduced in 1996. It still had a ways to go but part of the comparison that makes the Qualcomm chip look bad is that Rosetta is built into the chip on the M1 which Microsoft hasn't baked the translation layer into the chip yet. In this case it is better that Apple has designed their own chip since they were able to do this.
@@williamdrum9899 From a recent Old New Thing article called "Why does the usage of the initial registers of a Win32 process depend on whether it is a 32-bit or 64-bit process?", Raymond Chen notes: "Windows has supported many 32-bit processor architectures, and I’ve covered many of them in the past: x86-32, Alpha AXP, MIPS III, PowerPC, SuperH-3, and ARM. It also has supported a number of 64-bit processor architectures, including Alpha AXP (using all 64 bits this time), Itanium, x86-64, and AArch64." Windows has existed on a lot of things that aren't x86 :)
What Apple's done with their chips is nothing short of a minor miracle. But so far every other ARM SoC is hot garbage from a raw performance standpoint. The other issue is Apple has tight control of their ecosystem, so they can force devs on to a new architecture. Microsoft would have a much harder time with that. On top of that, after Arm (the company) announced more licensing restrictions, I'm starting to think RISC-V is the way forward. There's very few reasons to move away from x86 in the meantime.
Agreed. And even if there weren’t licensing restrictions for ARM, the fact that RISC-V is an open, royalty-free standard means that it (the ISA) is immune to international trade restrictions. If the US government decided to eliminate China’s access to SiFive, for example, China could still design its own RISC-V chips: the sanction wouldn’t immediately topple China’s entire hardware AND software stack. For this reason, nation-states (e.g. China, EU, India) are pouring BIG money into RISC-V: it’s difficult for the free markets to compete with unlimited military funding.
Honestly, I think the main reason Apple is currently so far ahead of everyone else is because ARM seems to be going through what x86 was going through before AMD released the Ryzen line. Everyone other than Apple is just trying to catch up to Qualcomm while Qualcomm has no incentive to majorly improve their chips.
For efficiency unfortunately, the SQ3 is built on a significantly inferior production node (Samsung 5nm vs the M1's TSMC 5nm). Based on the gains that Qualcomm made with the 8gen1 plus vs 8 gen 1, my guess would be a 20% improvement in MC performance whilst using 20-30% less power if they had also bothered to use the newer cores. Qualcomm seems to be waiting on the development of their Nuvia cores before making a real effort on WoA. TBF, it seems that the core was delayed by at least a year but unfortunately, the exclusivity deal they have with Microsoft is making them very complacent.
12:35 It's "champing at the bit" (sometimes mistaken as "chomping" ), not "jumping". It comes from horse racing, the "bit' is the part of the harness that is in the horse's mouth. Horses champ at the bit when they're anxious, often before horse races.
Very informative and well put together video. Great job. Your channel is still the best at it, compressing a lot of testing work and research in a fun to watch and easy to understand video. Thx!
This kit only shows that when the surface pro sales bombed, they needed a new way to sell the stockpile of parts nobody wanted to pay for in the form of surface pros lol.
I was just getting into computers around 2000 when things were changing so fast people said your computer would be completely outdated by the time you carried it ouf of the store. How times have changed... MS can make a computer that's several YEARS behind and while it's not a great deal, it's also not a ridiculous idea imagining someone using this thing. Nintendo is happily two generations behind its competition. People keep their phones for 5 years. Most of the progress is happening in GPUs and more specialized chips but regular people can't afford the new ones anyway. It's a weird time, isn't it? Extra performance is a nice bonus nowadays, but hardly a game-changer unless you have very specific needs for it.
11 on idle? Man, that's a ton for an ARM chip. My x86 Linux laptop hovers between 7.5 and 8.5 watts on idle, and that's an old 8th gen Intel processor. On a modern AMD chip, it easily dips down to 5 watts.
I think apple sees it ironically as a dual sided win. If companies give up they own the arm pc space entirely, if companies get ahead, then they finally get a vast array of Multiplatform games and programs without lifting a finger.
Quinn you hit the heart of the matter dead on its head, Qualcomm's very strong monopoly over Windows creates complications whereby it scares developers away rather than welcoming them to develop their apps in ARM. Qualcomm is too confident and comfortable as it has too many stans that can't admit that other chips are doing/capable of doing better. I remember more than half a decade ago when Apple released their Bionic chip (can't remember the version) that clearly beats any Snapdragon powered phones, was met with blatant fanboy denials claiming a lot of negative things that was wrong. And Qualcomm's response was not good either. What they did was increase the energy usage (wattage) and crank up clock speed and core count and called it a day. Ever since then, Qualcomm Snapdragon have always been playing catchup with Apple Silicon be it M1/M2 or Bionic, and often times at the expense of efficiency. The stans have made it harder too for other chip maker such as Exynos from Samsung, with recent rumors from industry insiders of Samsung possibly moving on from Exynos and primarily use Snapdragon SOCs. Huawei's Hisilicon Kirin chips are interesting. But due to tensions from China's adamant surveillance over foreign data, and Huawei's deep relationship with the CCP, I don't think any international companies would be looking into developing for Kirin soon. Lastly, Google Tensor. Google Tensor reminds me of the "early" days of Iphones. Underpowered, but super well optimized. While Tensor is not as fast as Snapdragon's flagship counterpart, for what it is intended to do it's doing really well. I think Chromebook and ChromeOS can greatly benefit from integration between the Tensor CPU and the OS. Unfortunately, not so much for Windows, given that the two OSes are competing. I don't know what the future of ARM CPUs in the Windows market would be. If there's more competition, that would force the companies to evolve their chips better, but too much CPU might cause confusion at the software development level. Love it or hate it, I still have to give it to Apple for really pushing ARM computing to the next level. They didn't release a haphazard product. They ensure that the end product released was 99% usable and faster than most computers on the market, at an acceptable price to performance ratio. I, a Windows user myself can admit to that. Yet, at the same time I also know Apple's "walled garden" approach to their design, research, and development, allows for ARM computing to be such a success within their product line. It creates an easy standard/guideline for devs to follow when developing an application for MacOS.
Qualcomm's Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 has a better GPU when compared to the A16 and it's multi-core performance is only slightly behind. The single core performance and power consumption is where Apple has a significant advantage. Qualcomm's Oryon CPU releasing next year is meant to remedy the deficiencies in CPU performance as it is made by the team behind Apple's SoCs.
I was among one of the first developers working on ARM-version of 64-bit Windows and the development kit for it... We used to cross-compile on x86 until there was ARM hardware to run the development kit.
Seems like a great little box to run an ARM Linux distro on. About the storage situation, it _looks_ like there's space for the standoff to exist - considered just moving the existing standoff there?
Haven’t watched this guy since iOS 13 JB was released and coming back, he’s so much more entertaining. Well done Snazzy Labs, you re-earned my subscription
11:48 The fact that this is under $1000 tells me that at the last minute they decided to not market it towards consumers. Dev kits are traditionally expensive, just look at the Nvidia Orin NX $499 and its just the CPU and RAM, you have to provide the rest of the computer if you want the whole computer the Orin AGX can be as much as $2000 for the 64GB model that has the same CPU as the 4GB model(but better GPU similar to an RTX 3050 mobile at 1024FP32 and 1024INT+FP32)
Of note, while Orin should be notebly faster than the SQ3, it should be less efficient than the SQ3 possibly pushing total system power abive 60w. because i beleive Orin is on Samsung 8nm instead of samsing 5nm. Apple is far ahead of the SQ3 partly due to their years of custom hardware optimsation speciffically for IOS and MacOS(and optimizing sofrware for the hardware), but also because Samsung 5nm is closer in efficiency to TSMC 7nm, which puts this SQ3 chip on 2019 Apple A13 level of node efficiency. Even the 2020 Mac Mini was on TSMC 5nm which was a huge leap over 7nm in performance per watt
@@snazzy True they probably do need to bring this in as a loss leader to help future sales. And holy crap that die is massive. 340mm²? WTF does it have in there? This thing is massively more expensive than i expected, probably around the cost of the RTX 3060. You get 16 x86 cores from AMD in around 1/2 the space of these 8 cores. Heck the AMD equivelant of this, the 6800u is only 208mm² and that has an imensely powerful GPU for a mobile device and the CPU is both more powerful, and more efficient on par and sometimes better than the M1.
The elephant in the room with M1 and M2 is GPU. Specifically with multiple displays. GPU performance is behind Intel iGPUs from 2018, and not to mention the PCIe controllers have a chip errata that prevents dGPUs from being used, even on other OS’s like Linux that do have drivers available. The fact that no one from the Mac community really wants to talk about this is concerning.
Yeah, we bought a couple Surface X (ARM) tablets two years ago and constantly hit issues with apps that might not install, or would only see Windows 10 as a 32-bit OS (which it's not) but we even had some installers sense 32-bit and then not install. Browsing and some other tasks were okay, but the 3rd party app support for ARM just really need to improve before Windows on ARM is widely usable.
@@SchwertKruemel Probably in Windows 11. - which we didn't have installed on the Surface X when we used it (pre-11) so it was just a non-starter for us. Which is a shame because it was a quiet, thin, large, sleek and nice tablet. Otherwise fast, but it just wouldn't run what we wanted to run on it.
Its always nice to have some competition. Now Microsoft was never about cutting edge hardware, or budget friendly. Hell, its so bad it makes apple looks good, but, they get points for trying and its always nice to see a major OS developer caring about ARM. Now Kudos for apple for bringing the best in both Intel and AMD. Now its a good time to get w/e chip you like.
ARM is the future of computing. You can thank Sophie Wilson for her contributions to the instruction set, which is part of what makes it more efficient. I think the next step in the development of ARM will be massive parallel processing, that is, having a large number (100+) of high-efficiency cores that can be turned on and off as needed. That way, we can use very little power for the low-intensity job of running Microsoft Word, compared to having every core run at once when editing videos.
Totally Agree. Microsoft may have buried Acorn as a company, but Acorn are having the last laugh and I couldn't be happier. I think it is long overdue time for Acorn to make a comeback and utilise the modern tech of today with RiscOS. Yes I know RiscOS is on Raspberry PI but those systems are severely under powered. Imagine a RiscOS system with 32GB RAM, an OS that is 10MB stored in flash ROM with an equal OS footprint to match, an SSD and an RTX3080. With the support on board I just don't think Microsoft or Apple could compete.
I eventually want to get an ARM-based PC for coding, but since other members of my team already have M1 Macs, and they still represent such a small portion of our current target market, I'm still holding out and using an energy hog of a PC.
If it's effectively the same board as the surface pro 9 (its seems resonable to think so) it make sense to have the mini display port as the main display output (it could be a full size dp port however, maybe not due to board space constraint...) because current laptops use the e-DP protocol for the integrated screen. Which is basically the samething as external DP but in another formfactor.
This is such great timing I was literally looking for a windows on arm bench mark. I really want/wanted to see how good software compatibility has gotten on arm for windows. Especially video games.
@@Mereo110 ya no that’s definitely not true I have gotten all of my steam games working on a MacBook using parallels so that’s not even close to true bud. Base m1 MacBook Air and they ran AMAZINGLY I was astonished at the performance
People REALLY underestimate just how amazing the M1/M2 chips are. They beat out everything easily in the same class range and often punch way above their own class. I'd really love to see another competitor bring ARM processors that rival Apple just for everything else.
Funny since we're talking about Apple here, but even the pricing is pretty decent now. Actually thinking about buying a second hand Mac Mini for recording music since the 3500U in my laptop has abysmal performance. At least AMD improved their laptop processors quite a bit since that abomination
Efficiency, absolutely. Performance? No. Laptop processors with AMD 5000 and 6000, and Intel 12th gen are usually more powerful, and AMD 6000 also has comparable integrated graphics.
Just so you know the guys that designed the M1, M2 etc. founded Nuvia and where bought buy Qualcomm last year. There will be very goody ARM chips in the future for Windows PCs….
Microsoft did ARM btw a decade ago with Windows RT. People hated it because it didn't play legacy Windows apps without realizing why. They had a massive marketing blunder with that then just buckled and dropped support for RT altogether, which has been symptomatic of Microsoft for a long time. They have a great idea which doesn't fully fly early and needs work but they abandon it and someone picks it up later. Same case with their Metro UI, Live Tiles.
Question though - does Intel has any plans to go into ARM? Or perhaps, AMD? I feel like both could be making great cpu's - although I'd give intel a slight advantage on this one. Also: Nvidia ARM cpu's??
Рік тому+2
The Microsoft dev kit does have one important advantage for some workloads - 32 GB of RAM. The base configuration of the Mac Mini has only 8 GB. That won't show up in most benchmark results but will hold it back in some real world uses.
Windows has been on retail ARM for about 10 years, they have released several devkits over the years. Rosetta is not a translation layer in the OS, it is a x86 interpretation chip that is on the M1 SOC, this is why it is so much better than Rosetta 1 which was purely software, This is also why rosetta works on Linux on the m1, because the VM can still send the 'same' commands to the SOC and the SOC will run them through the translation chip. So software -> linux -> vm container -> MacOS -> translation chip -> native code. It may also be possible that linux inatively supports the rosetta SOC and it may run the translation prior to exiting the VM, it's a fascinating area. Another point that needs to be made is that devkits typically use lower-end older CPUs of the same base type (x86, ARM, RISC), it was the same with early playstation devkits which had lower specs than the final retail release. Apple was a bit different here in that they were devkitting the CPU as well as the OS and other hardwarre components, whereas MS is only devving the OS. Also most devkits (this one included), rely on another sytem for the actual programming, the devkit being only for testing the software on compatible hardware to what is going to be released. There are many other manufacturers of ARM CPUs, AMD for one has been making ARM systems and SOCs for a very long time and make quite performant ones, but they are specialised cpus for doing particular things, not a general purpose SOC. I believe Microsoft will use the remaining time with qualcom to fine-tune windows on ARM, then when the CPU agreement (which seems like it should be a breach of competition laws) is finished they will move onto a different provider's cpus. Qualcom has a really pooor history of stifling innovation and trying to legally bind both their suppliers and their competition (see their breach of the wifi patents that Australia holds, Apple was also involved on this one, or their suing of ARM when they tried to use their aquisition of another much smaller company to bypass their legal contracts with ARM). Any which way, I'm not going to be buying an ARM system as a daily driver anytime soon.
one thing to worry about is that in future revisions and once native arm apps for mac reach a complete level, apple might remove the in-chip rosetta support and use that chip space for more ai or encoders stuff. i mean, what point is there to have it, if all apps run natively and you get no profit from it?
@@giornikitop5373 The original plan was for them to have removed it and leave software translation in place for the M2, but the M2 released is simply a power uncapped M1 with more cores. Although it doesn't stack up against AMD at the same wattage. So essentially like an i9 (m2) vs an i7 (m1). This occurred because the next gen chip they are working on was supposed to have launched by now. AFAIK the plan to remove the x86 translation hardware is still in place. So that efficiency of translation may probably start to look more like rosetta 1 (a very slow pig). At the next CPU product launch unless they use the M1 design again.
Electron apps can run native code, correct? So it would not be unexpected for an electron app to have compatibility issues. It is my understanding that VS Code uses native code for performance and that if it not require this code, it could be purely browser based. Do the programs that fail on the devkit also fail in emulation on the mac?
i dont like the fact that you are comparing the microsoft devkit directly to the m1 mac mini... as you said, its only a devkit that enables developers to make apps for arm. Apple did the same, also with a slower chip. my point is that maybe this is just a cost saving alternative, and not the chip that microsoft might actually want in their high-end arm computers:)
Hoping this means, I can soon replace the melty "workstation" intel laptop with something power efficient, and suited to my mostly C++ compilation/python/remote access workloads.
I think the problem is Microsoft's marketing and handling of Windows RT screwed up public expectations of Windows ARM devices. The system was incredibly locked down; you could only install apps through Microsoft's store, of which there was little to no incentive for developers to put serious effort into doing and maintaining. They marketed the original Surface RT as a full fledged windows experience, which it was but only technically when no major 3rd party apps could be installed. Then there was the whole issue of Windows 8's UI being so radically different from what users were use to and expecting that it never really caught on. They barely got two iterations of the Surface RT tablets before killing the Windows RT line and the development team because of Microsoft's own mishandling of the project. Now, 10 years later they're trying to play catch-up.
AMD and Intel offered long before the M1 CPUs with as little as 6W. And the Goldmonts weren't slow either. My first ARM based Windows was the Siemens Simpad in 2001, running Windows CE. There was bunch of software available too. Putty, Office etcpp. And even before that there was Windows CE for other ARM-plattforms though not targeted at endusers.
There is nothing wrong with lower performance. The pricing on the other hand needs to reflect that. I was really excited about ThinkPad X13s but the value is just not there.
Would a more fair comparison have been with the Apple transition kit device and this one from Microsoft? Is this the chip Microsoft has settled on for production?
imho: ARM on PCs is too late and giving too much legal trouble. Either Qualcomm settles down things quickly, MediaTek is able to introduce competition, or RISC-V is gonna arrive by the time OEMs are willing to switch en masse.
The chrome/ Electron apps are completely normal to be really slow through emulation. Generally the ARM architecture has big issues with JavaScript, thus some years ago additional ASIC block was added to the ARM chips to provide hardware acceleration specifically for JS operations. When you use emulation, this block cannot be properly used, thus the entire JS math goes over the CPU, which cannot really handle it due to the way it handles float math. Anything which is JavaScript based, cannot really run under emulator. SInce Apple is doing the emulation on hardware level, generally the JS code is handled properly and is hardware accelerated(only under Rosetta2). However, just try running something JavaScript based under Parallels/ QEMU and you will see what big blow it will get. I personally think that JavaScript is one of the worst things that ever happened in the modern tech...
I am no expert in this space - but I assume the hardware decisions you found is just them designing something new to use up the overproduction of surface parts
Well, it was Microsoft who choose to rely on a single company once again for this new Windows on Arm run, just like WP7 was Qualcomm only. It was also Microsoft who spent a decade not porting its apps for Arm (counting from Windows RT release in 2012), if it took Microsoft 10 years, it surely is not at all a trust sign for devs to rush on it.
One big reason is that Apple has choosen to forgo intel processor. So developers have to move to ARM if they want to keep providing for Macs. Windows however, isn't going to do that (just yet), so it gives even less of an incentive for developers to do the work.
MS has been on a mission to back port a lot of it’s legacy libs. Their adherence to long term support is admirable but it’s a helluva lot of tech debt. Also they support 32 but binaries, something I dearly wish Apple would have done instead of the Catalina field burner. That Qualcomm just gets bodied by Apple silicon.
I don't care much about either company... but traditionally ARM is the way to go when it comes to compute speed vs chip size vs watts. That said, ARM has really taken a turn recently when all the big names decided to hop on the ARM team and put their asses in the seats of those pushing the dev direction. ARM systems have traditionally been designed for RISC style computing... the problem comes, therefore, when companies that tend to bloat the software/hardware jump in and say they need this and that added to the set of instructions. It causes all sorts of slowdowns in the chip that aren't intended.
Are you having problems with your monitor? It seems like it doesn't play well with HDR monitors. (Warning: All sales are final. No returns will be accepted once placed.)
I am one of the few that is really against an ARM based world. It seems that ARM can really hinder right to repair. You can't just upgrade your ram or hard drive or cpu or gpu or replace them if they go bad. I left Apple when they started soldering every damn component and now you can't even unsolder the component. You basically have to buy a whole new computer since everything is on one chip. I don't care how much more efficient ARM is right now.
Unless you're doing CPU intensive stuff all the time, which 99% of the people doesn't, if you're not buying an M1 mac mini thinking the hardware is dated then you're losing on a hidden gem; I’m amazed this thing isn’t more popular. I got one this year with a good discount and I can recommend people to get one with my eyes closed, just get the 16GB version and you're set. It even let me install the OS on an external 2TB NVMe SSD with a thunderbolt enclosure.
I have an M1 Air and a 15W 4700U based laptop. The honest truth is the M1 is slower, yes, if I do something that it specializes in, like the video editing, it is fast. But if I need to transcode the 4700U is faster. Graphics, AMD is faster, and the power difference is negligible.
Qualcomm seems to be singlehandedly holding back ARM progress on non-apple platforms.
Pretty much, yes.
Hell, even Rock chip is making real progress ar this point. The new RK series SoCs have some legitimately impressive performance compared to previous generations.
Aside from Nvidia & Apple they're literally the only ARM company that makes PC-level ARM chips. The big Snapdragon 9 Gen 1 ain't coming until 2024, but don't expect RTX 3080 level of performance from them
Mediacom could be a player too. And I think if the focus early on would be energy efficient Windows laptops that could compete with the M1 Air in terms of price (half the price, a little slower, but similar battery life at least), Microsoft could maybe take that edge they don't get as much with cheaper Celeron/Atom laptops.
@@goruyorsunuzz they already know all that from the rt and windows phone days.
I bought an RT when they released and really liked it, but it was certainly limited due to lack of developer support. Sadly, the same thing happened to the Windows phone, which I also really liked.
I had a Nokia Lumia 920. Was an amazing phone but the app store was god awful.
I loved Windows Phone. RIP.
I used the Lumia 920 for almost 5 years. It was great.
@@SudoYETI That was the same model I had. Yep, amazing phone.
I remember using the Surface RT, it was sooo janky but I made it work for what I needed somehow
The absolute worst part about this is that I see it being achievable unlike some of the pie in the sky ambitions they have sometimes.
Fantastic video and a great breakdown
I don't see why they'd bother to dothis. They can just sit and as long as devs don't care about Mac (which is most of the time), Intel and AMD wouldn't switch and they'd keep minting money. This is something that s not happening that Apple fans (myself inluded) insist is happening: there is no ARM revolution.
@@abubakrakram6208 Wanna bet an arm on that?
@@wheelsonfire1982 I might. Money talks, not efficiency.
Windows on ARM has came a long way since it was originally introduced in 1996. It still had a ways to go but part of the comparison that makes the Qualcomm chip look bad is that Rosetta is built into the chip on the M1 which Microsoft hasn't baked the translation layer into the chip yet. In this case it is better that Apple has designed their own chip since they were able to do this.
I didn't think windows existed on anything other than x86
@@williamdrum9899 From a recent Old New Thing article called "Why does the usage of the initial registers of a Win32 process depend on whether it is a 32-bit or 64-bit process?", Raymond Chen notes: "Windows has supported many 32-bit processor architectures, and I’ve covered many of them in the past: x86-32, Alpha AXP, MIPS III, PowerPC, SuperH-3, and ARM. It also has supported a number of 64-bit processor architectures, including Alpha AXP (using all 64 bits this time), Itanium, x86-64, and AArch64."
Windows has existed on a lot of things that aren't x86 :)
Rosetta isn't built on to the chip. M1 just supports x86 semantics for memory ordering which fixes most of the performance gap.
Firefox has arm support for windows, I use it in parallels on my Mac Studio.
What Apple's done with their chips is nothing short of a minor miracle. But so far every other ARM SoC is hot garbage from a raw performance standpoint. The other issue is Apple has tight control of their ecosystem, so they can force devs on to a new architecture. Microsoft would have a much harder time with that. On top of that, after Arm (the company) announced more licensing restrictions, I'm starting to think RISC-V is the way forward. There's very few reasons to move away from x86 in the meantime.
My thoughts exactly.
Agreed. And even if there weren’t licensing restrictions for ARM, the fact that RISC-V is an open, royalty-free standard means that it (the ISA) is immune to international trade restrictions. If the US government decided to eliminate China’s access to SiFive, for example, China could still design its own RISC-V chips: the sanction wouldn’t immediately topple China’s entire hardware AND software stack. For this reason, nation-states (e.g. China, EU, India) are pouring BIG money into RISC-V: it’s difficult for the free markets to compete with unlimited military funding.
Honestly, I think the main reason Apple is currently so far ahead of everyone else is because ARM seems to be going through what x86 was going through before AMD released the Ryzen line. Everyone other than Apple is just trying to catch up to Qualcomm while Qualcomm has no incentive to majorly improve their chips.
@@PercyPanleo Qualcomm seems thoroughly checked out of ARM and is instead eagerly awaiting the rise of RISC-V without risking their own farm over it.
all of them are garbage even apple. there's a reason why they're relegated to only showing geekbench instead of any real world benchmark.
For efficiency unfortunately, the SQ3 is built on a significantly inferior production node (Samsung 5nm vs the M1's TSMC 5nm). Based on the gains that Qualcomm made with the 8gen1 plus vs 8 gen 1, my guess would be a 20% improvement in MC performance whilst using 20-30% less power if they had also bothered to use the newer cores.
Qualcomm seems to be waiting on the development of their Nuvia cores before making a real effort on WoA. TBF, it seems that the core was delayed by at least a year but unfortunately, the exclusivity deal they have with Microsoft is making them very complacent.
remember they're on a lawsuit with ARM Holdings over the tech they got from Nuvia, so uh... have fun
12:35 It's "champing at the bit" (sometimes mistaken as "chomping" ), not "jumping". It comes from horse racing, the "bit' is the part of the harness that is in the horse's mouth. Horses champ at the bit when they're anxious, often before horse races.
Very informative and well put together video. Great job. Your channel is still the best at it, compressing a lot of testing work and research in a fun to watch and easy to understand video. Thx!
Thank you very much!
Great to see even Microsoft is starting to take ARM desktops seriously.
This kit only shows that when the surface pro sales bombed, they needed a new way to sell the stockpile of parts nobody wanted to pay for in the form of surface pros lol.
They do for a while… However developers…
I was just getting into computers around 2000 when things were changing so fast people said your computer would be completely outdated by the time you carried it ouf of the store. How times have changed... MS can make a computer that's several YEARS behind and while it's not a great deal, it's also not a ridiculous idea imagining someone using this thing. Nintendo is happily two generations behind its competition. People keep their phones for 5 years. Most of the progress is happening in GPUs and more specialized chips but regular people can't afford the new ones anyway. It's a weird time, isn't it? Extra performance is a nice bonus nowadays, but hardly a game-changer unless you have very specific needs for it.
11 on idle? Man, that's a ton for an ARM chip. My x86 Linux laptop hovers between 7.5 and 8.5 watts on idle, and that's an old 8th gen Intel processor. On a modern AMD chip, it easily dips down to 5 watts.
Man, I didn't know some computers actually used less energy than a LED bulb when gaming PCs have a 350W power supply at the (very) least
@@semisagoglu Those gaming pc's also have quite low idles compared to their peak draws though.
@@semisagoglu I mean, you're basically running a jet engine on those gaming machines. Dedicated GPUs need a ton of power.
I think apple sees it ironically as a dual sided win. If companies give up they own the arm pc space entirely, if companies get ahead, then they finally get a vast array of Multiplatform games and programs without lifting a finger.
Quinn you hit the heart of the matter dead on its head, Qualcomm's very strong monopoly over Windows creates complications whereby it scares developers away rather than welcoming them to develop their apps in ARM.
Qualcomm is too confident and comfortable as it has too many stans that can't admit that other chips are doing/capable of doing better. I remember more than half a decade ago when Apple released their Bionic chip (can't remember the version) that clearly beats any Snapdragon powered phones, was met with blatant fanboy denials claiming a lot of negative things that was wrong. And Qualcomm's response was not good either. What they did was increase the energy usage (wattage) and crank up clock speed and core count and called it a day. Ever since then, Qualcomm Snapdragon have always been playing catchup with Apple Silicon be it M1/M2 or Bionic, and often times at the expense of efficiency.
The stans have made it harder too for other chip maker such as Exynos from Samsung, with recent rumors from industry insiders of Samsung possibly moving on from Exynos and primarily use Snapdragon SOCs.
Huawei's Hisilicon Kirin chips are interesting. But due to tensions from China's adamant surveillance over foreign data, and Huawei's deep relationship with the CCP, I don't think any international companies would be looking into developing for Kirin soon.
Lastly, Google Tensor. Google Tensor reminds me of the "early" days of Iphones. Underpowered, but super well optimized. While Tensor is not as fast as Snapdragon's flagship counterpart, for what it is intended to do it's doing really well. I think Chromebook and ChromeOS can greatly benefit from integration between the Tensor CPU and the OS. Unfortunately, not so much for Windows, given that the two OSes are competing.
I don't know what the future of ARM CPUs in the Windows market would be. If there's more competition, that would force the companies to evolve their chips better, but too much CPU might cause confusion at the software development level.
Love it or hate it, I still have to give it to Apple for really pushing ARM computing to the next level. They didn't release a haphazard product. They ensure that the end product released was 99% usable and faster than most computers on the market, at an acceptable price to performance ratio. I, a Windows user myself can admit to that. Yet, at the same time I also know Apple's "walled garden" approach to their design, research, and development, allows for ARM computing to be such a success within their product line. It creates an easy standard/guideline for devs to follow when developing an application for MacOS.
Qualcomm's Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 has a better GPU when compared to the A16 and it's multi-core performance is only slightly behind. The single core performance and power consumption is where Apple has a significant advantage. Qualcomm's Oryon CPU releasing next year is meant to remedy the deficiencies in CPU performance as it is made by the team behind Apple's SoCs.
The windows ARM PC would not be all that bad if it used Nvidia Jetson ORIN.
I was among one of the first developers working on ARM-version of 64-bit Windows and the development kit for it... We used to cross-compile on x86 until there was ARM hardware to run the development kit.
Seems like a great little box to run an ARM Linux distro on. About the storage situation, it _looks_ like there's space for the standoff to exist - considered just moving the existing standoff there?
I think there are likely better options for Linux, Lotta pretty beefy SBCs out there.
@@luigimaster111 the 32GB RAM is very appealing for Linux use.
just get an mac mini. and if you don't care about performance at all, something from pine 64
12:13 "Not even scratching the surface". 😏
Haven’t watched this guy since iOS 13 JB was released and coming back, he’s so much more entertaining. Well done Snazzy Labs, you re-earned my subscription
11:48 The fact that this is under $1000 tells me that at the last minute they decided to not market it towards consumers.
Dev kits are traditionally expensive, just look at the Nvidia Orin NX $499 and its just the CPU and RAM, you have to provide the rest of the computer if you want the whole computer the Orin AGX can be as much as $2000 for the 64GB model that has the same CPU as the 4GB model(but better GPU similar to an RTX 3050 mobile at 1024FP32 and 1024INT+FP32)
Of note, while Orin should be notebly faster than the SQ3, it should be less efficient than the SQ3 possibly pushing total system power abive 60w. because i beleive Orin is on Samsung 8nm instead of samsing 5nm. Apple is far ahead of the SQ3 partly due to their years of custom hardware optimsation speciffically for IOS and MacOS(and optimizing sofrware for the hardware), but also because Samsung 5nm is closer in efficiency to TSMC 7nm, which puts this SQ3 chip on 2019 Apple A13 level of node efficiency. Even the 2020 Mac Mini was on TSMC 5nm which was a huge leap over 7nm in performance per watt
The Surface using the same board with 1/4 the memory is $1,500. So I think it’s a loss leader to plead with developers to bring their stuff over.
@@snazzy True they probably do need to bring this in as a loss leader to help future sales. And holy crap that die is massive. 340mm²? WTF does it have in there? This thing is massively more expensive than i expected, probably around the cost of the RTX 3060.
You get 16 x86 cores from AMD in around 1/2 the space of these 8 cores.
Heck the AMD equivelant of this, the 6800u is only 208mm² and that has an imensely powerful GPU for a mobile device and the CPU is both more powerful, and more efficient on par and sometimes better than the M1.
Qualcomm's got separate architecture for PCs called Oryon which is a year away
The elephant in the room with M1 and M2 is GPU. Specifically with multiple displays. GPU performance is behind Intel iGPUs from 2018, and not to mention the PCIe controllers have a chip errata that prevents dGPUs from being used, even on other OS’s like Linux that do have drivers available. The fact that no one from the Mac community really wants to talk about this is concerning.
Are you sure? I thought M1 outperforms iGPUs from Intel easily. AMD is very close with RDNA2
You said “jumping at the bit” in the last chapter - that’s an egg-corn I haven’t heard before! It’s “champing at the bit” (refers to horses)
Yeah, we bought a couple Surface X (ARM) tablets two years ago and constantly hit issues with apps that might not install, or would only see Windows 10 as a 32-bit OS (which it's not) but we even had some installers sense 32-bit and then not install. Browsing and some other tasks were okay, but the 3rd party app support for ARM just really need to improve before Windows on ARM is widely usable.
the 32bi problem probably comes from windows on arm early on only supporting x86 emulation for 32bit apps. The 64bit support came much much later
@@SchwertKruemel Probably in Windows 11. - which we didn't have installed on the Surface X when we used it (pre-11) so it was just a non-starter for us. Which is a shame because it was a quiet, thin, large, sleek and nice tablet. Otherwise fast, but it just wouldn't run what we wanted to run on it.
Its always nice to have some competition. Now Microsoft was never about cutting edge hardware, or budget friendly. Hell, its so bad it makes apple looks good, but, they get points for trying and its always nice to see a major OS developer caring about ARM. Now Kudos for apple for bringing the best in both Intel and AMD. Now its a good time to get w/e chip you like.
Will be interesting to see how the new Qualcomm Oryon chips compare to the M series chips whenever they launch.
I want to see beard on your channel art. Great video!
ARM is the future of computing. You can thank Sophie Wilson for her contributions to the instruction set, which is part of what makes it more efficient. I think the next step in the development of ARM will be massive parallel processing, that is, having a large number (100+) of high-efficiency cores that can be turned on and off as needed. That way, we can use very little power for the low-intensity job of running Microsoft Word, compared to having every core run at once when editing videos.
Totally Agree. Microsoft may have buried Acorn as a company, but Acorn are having the last laugh and I couldn't be happier. I think it is long overdue time for Acorn to make a comeback and utilise the modern tech of today with RiscOS. Yes I know RiscOS is on Raspberry PI but those systems are severely under powered. Imagine a RiscOS system with 32GB RAM, an OS that is 10MB stored in flash ROM with an equal OS footprint to match, an SSD and an RTX3080. With the support on board I just don't think Microsoft or Apple could compete.
I thought RISC-V was the future.
@@jthwang I can't see it anytime soon. I don't know why it is such a big thing other than for political reasons.
@@johntrevy1 Oh? Did a politician hype it up?
@@jthwang All I hear is hype about how it is going to be an open architecture to stick it to the main manufacturers. Purely political.
I eventually want to get an ARM-based PC for coding, but since other members of my team already have M1 Macs, and they still represent such a small portion of our current target market, I'm still holding out and using an energy hog of a PC.
If it's effectively the same board as the surface pro 9 (its seems resonable to think so) it make sense to have the mini display port as the main display output (it could be a full size dp port however, maybe not due to board space constraint...) because current laptops use the e-DP protocol for the integrated screen. Which is basically the samething as external DP but in another formfactor.
This is such great timing I was literally looking for a windows on arm bench mark. I really want/wanted to see how good software compatibility has gotten on arm for windows. Especially video games.
If you want games support, don't bother with Arm, stay with x86.
@@Mereo110 ya no that’s definitely not true I have gotten all of my steam games working on a MacBook using parallels so that’s not even close to true bud. Base m1 MacBook Air and they ran AMAZINGLY I was astonished at the performance
1:23 you giggled when you realized you just did a Linus segue
People REALLY underestimate just how amazing the M1/M2 chips are. They beat out everything easily in the same class range and often punch way above their own class. I'd really love to see another competitor bring ARM processors that rival Apple just for everything else.
True but it’s Mac OS. I prefer Windows :/
Funny since we're talking about Apple here, but even the pricing is pretty decent now. Actually thinking about buying a second hand Mac Mini for recording music since the 3500U in my laptop has abysmal performance. At least AMD improved their laptop processors quite a bit since that abomination
@elfrjz in what workload?
@elfrjz i see, i thought it was much better since it benches twice as fast as mx250 on gfxbench
Efficiency, absolutely. Performance? No. Laptop processors with AMD 5000 and 6000, and Intel 12th gen are usually more powerful, and AMD 6000 also has comparable integrated graphics.
Nice, we have 2 Facebook browsing machines now to choose from
Just so you know the guys that designed the M1, M2 etc. founded Nuvia and where bought buy Qualcomm last year. There will be very goody ARM chips in the future for Windows PCs….
This is the point where Apple tells Microsoft "hey, just license your OS to us. We will take care of the hardware for ya!" LOL
that starting plug almost made me cut the video off lol.
7:29 is that a spider moving up? 🕷
I guess they do not want to make a M1 Like ARM Chip, but I don't know why or they don't know how.
Microsoft did ARM btw a decade ago with Windows RT. People hated it because it didn't play legacy Windows apps without realizing why. They had a massive marketing blunder with that then just buckled and dropped support for RT altogether, which has been symptomatic of Microsoft for a long time. They have a great idea which doesn't fully fly early and needs work but they abandon it and someone picks it up later. Same case with their Metro UI, Live Tiles.
As a fan of Windows 8.1 and Windows phone I can confirm
aaah, an old proart. I see you're a man of culture
New era of windows on mac is upon us
was that a bently in the dashcam sponsor spot??
Question though - does Intel has any plans to go into ARM?
Or perhaps, AMD?
I feel like both could be making great cpu's - although I'd give intel a slight advantage on this one.
Also: Nvidia ARM cpu's??
The Microsoft dev kit does have one important advantage for some workloads - 32 GB of RAM. The base configuration of the Mac Mini has only 8 GB. That won't show up in most benchmark results but will hold it back in some real world uses.
...can it run linux? But remember, the M1 has the memory on-die. So what's the memory throughput on the new MS box? Probably not 800GB/S.
Windows has been on retail ARM for about 10 years, they have released several devkits over the years.
Rosetta is not a translation layer in the OS, it is a x86 interpretation chip that is on the M1 SOC, this is why it is so much better than Rosetta 1 which was purely software, This is also why rosetta works on Linux on the m1, because the VM can still send the 'same' commands to the SOC and the SOC will run them through the translation chip. So software -> linux -> vm container -> MacOS -> translation chip -> native code. It may also be possible that linux inatively supports the rosetta SOC and it may run the translation prior to exiting the VM, it's a fascinating area.
Another point that needs to be made is that devkits typically use lower-end older CPUs of the same base type (x86, ARM, RISC), it was the same with early playstation devkits which had lower specs than the final retail release. Apple was a bit different here in that they were devkitting the CPU as well as the OS and other hardwarre components, whereas MS is only devving the OS. Also most devkits (this one included), rely on another sytem for the actual programming, the devkit being only for testing the software on compatible hardware to what is going to be released.
There are many other manufacturers of ARM CPUs, AMD for one has been making ARM systems and SOCs for a very long time and make quite performant ones, but they are specialised cpus for doing particular things, not a general purpose SOC. I believe Microsoft will use the remaining time with qualcom to fine-tune windows on ARM, then when the CPU agreement (which seems like it should be a breach of competition laws) is finished they will move onto a different provider's cpus. Qualcom has a really pooor history of stifling innovation and trying to legally bind both their suppliers and their competition (see their breach of the wifi patents that Australia holds, Apple was also involved on this one, or their suing of ARM when they tried to use their aquisition of another much smaller company to bypass their legal contracts with ARM).
Any which way, I'm not going to be buying an ARM system as a daily driver anytime soon.
one thing to worry about is that in future revisions and once native arm apps for mac reach a complete level, apple might remove the in-chip rosetta support and use that chip space for more ai or encoders stuff. i mean, what point is there to have it, if all apps run natively and you get no profit from it?
@@giornikitop5373 The original plan was for them to have removed it and leave software translation in place for the M2, but the M2 released is simply a power uncapped M1 with more cores. Although it doesn't stack up against AMD at the same wattage.
So essentially like an i9 (m2) vs an i7 (m1).
This occurred because the next gen chip they are working on was supposed to have launched by now.
AFAIK the plan to remove the x86 translation hardware is still in place.
So that efficiency of translation may probably start to look more like rosetta 1 (a very slow pig). At the next CPU product launch unless they use the M1 design again.
I thought most people don't compile etc on a dev kit, they only use it for compatibility and performance testing. Is that not the case?
The x86 emulation is actually huge. ARM is the future for sure
I kinda want to put and 8TB SSD in it and make it a tiny Plex server, lol.
Electron apps can run native code, correct? So it would not be unexpected for an electron app to have compatibility issues. It is my understanding that VS Code uses native code for performance and that if it not require this code, it could be purely browser based.
Do the programs that fail on the devkit also fail in emulation on the mac?
i dont like the fact that you are comparing the microsoft devkit directly to the m1 mac mini... as you said, its only a devkit that enables developers to make apps for arm. Apple did the same, also with a slower chip. my point is that maybe this is just a cost saving alternative, and not the chip that microsoft might actually want in their high-end arm computers:)
Please watch the video. Even comparing the A12Z DTK, this chip gets crushed.
Also, even if that were true, the chip is available today in the Surface Pro 9 sold to the public. So they deserve the heat.
@@snazzy yeah you are right:) thanks for the clarification
I don't like that you pointed out that this thing isn't super good. I disliked that.
Sorry, Bill.
The dash cam only works up 60c that's no where near hot enough for anyone that lives in the tropics
Ad was so long I forgot what this video was about 😂
Hoping this means, I can soon replace the melty "workstation" intel laptop with something power efficient, and suited to my mostly C++ compilation/python/remote access workloads.
At least they are able to create something working. What about longevity and sustainability in long run? oh well.
I still love windows on arm, because I have it installed on my phone.
Which is more useful than it sounds
The slicone platform created by Apple put the last nail in the WinTel coffin.
UA-cam keeps defaulting to 720p and i hate it so much I CAN tell the difference I shouldn’t have to change it every video
I think the problem is Microsoft's marketing and handling of Windows RT screwed up public expectations of Windows ARM devices. The system was incredibly locked down; you could only install apps through Microsoft's store, of which there was little to no incentive for developers to put serious effort into doing and maintaining. They marketed the original Surface RT as a full fledged windows experience, which it was but only technically when no major 3rd party apps could be installed. Then there was the whole issue of Windows 8's UI being so radically different from what users were use to and expecting that it never really caught on.
They barely got two iterations of the Surface RT tablets before killing the Windows RT line and the development team because of Microsoft's own mishandling of the project. Now, 10 years later they're trying to play catch-up.
AMD and Intel offered long before the M1 CPUs with as little as 6W. And the Goldmonts weren't slow either.
My first ARM based Windows was the Siemens Simpad in 2001, running Windows CE. There was bunch of software available too. Putty, Office etcpp. And even before that there was Windows CE for other ARM-plattforms though not targeted at endusers.
Remember you shouldn't compare the performance of a Devkit to a consumer machine.
i love the performance of my 2020 M1 macbook air and defenitly expect it to stay my main computer until 2025 at least
My 2015 Intel Air will probably be my main laptop until 2025 xD
I believe windows NT had many cpu platform versions... was ARM not one of them? Way back in like 1995.
No. Nt 3 has risc not arm
that moment when a base M1 MacBook now runs SWITCH emulation better than most windows laptops of comparable class
When possible to install Mac OS X on that volt era that will be competitor
There is nothing wrong with lower performance. The pricing on the other hand needs to reflect that. I was really excited about ThinkPad X13s but the value is just not there.
Would a more fair comparison have been with the Apple transition kit device and this one from Microsoft? Is this the chip Microsoft has settled on for production?
From the way windows look and function I’d say yes.
I was like "why does this dashcam footage look familiar?"....ohhhhh downtown SLC
imho: ARM on PCs is too late and giving too much legal trouble. Either Qualcomm settles down things quickly, MediaTek is able to introduce competition, or RISC-V is gonna arrive by the time OEMs are willing to switch en masse.
Well, I will not be getting any more ARM items if Microsoft/Qualacomm has anything to do with it.
The chrome/ Electron apps are completely normal to be really slow through emulation.
Generally the ARM architecture has big issues with JavaScript, thus some years ago additional ASIC block was added to the ARM chips to provide hardware acceleration specifically for JS operations.
When you use emulation, this block cannot be properly used, thus the entire JS math goes over the CPU, which cannot really handle it due to the way it handles float math.
Anything which is JavaScript based, cannot really run under emulator.
SInce Apple is doing the emulation on hardware level, generally the JS code is handled properly and is hardware accelerated(only under Rosetta2). However, just try running something JavaScript based under Parallels/ QEMU and you will see what big blow it will get.
I personally think that JavaScript is one of the worst things that ever happened in the modern tech...
I am no expert in this space - but I assume the hardware decisions you found is just them designing something new to use up the overproduction of surface parts
When I studied IT I found those news so exciting... now I realise its just always the same old stuff.
What do you propose? Bundle a M1 with the dev kit? The M1 wasn't Apples first Silicon regardless.
Well, it was Microsoft who choose to rely on a single company once again for this new Windows on Arm run, just like WP7 was Qualcomm only. It was also Microsoft who spent a decade not porting its apps for Arm (counting from Windows RT release in 2012), if it took Microsoft 10 years, it surely is not at all a trust sign for devs to rush on it.
I love the video but man I am MUCH more interested in that 360 dashcam. That sentry mode looks so cool!!
One big reason is that Apple has choosen to forgo intel processor. So developers have to move to ARM if they want to keep providing for Macs. Windows however, isn't going to do that (just yet), so it gives even less of an incentive for developers to do the work.
And that’s comparing to 2 year old M1 base model. Just think about M3 Ultra, not even a remote comparison 💀
MS has been on a mission to back port a lot of it’s legacy libs. Their adherence to long term support is admirable but it’s a helluva lot of tech debt. Also they support 32 but binaries, something I dearly wish Apple would have done instead of the Catalina field burner.
That Qualcomm just gets bodied by Apple silicon.
Incredible that that Microsoft has been so laughably slow in getting this working
I don't care much about either company... but traditionally ARM is the way to go when it comes to compute speed vs chip size vs watts. That said, ARM has really taken a turn recently when all the big names decided to hop on the ARM team and put their asses in the seats of those pushing the dev direction. ARM systems have traditionally been designed for RISC style computing... the problem comes, therefore, when companies that tend to bloat the software/hardware jump in and say they need this and that added to the set of instructions. It causes all sorts of slowdowns in the chip that aren't intended.
Windows on ARM has been around since at least 2000, with Pocket PC 2000.
Are you having problems with your monitor? It seems like it doesn't play well with HDR monitors.
(Warning: All sales are final. No returns will be accepted once placed.)
Bro just pulled a linus tech tips segway
I wish one day a Hackintosh on the Orange pi 5 board, 32gb ram, 8cpu ARM
Holy hell that sponsor what loooong.
Apple made their own chip/platform, and it's obvious how distinct an advantage that gave them over Microsoft and some other companies.
Is that the LTT Screw driver I noticed in the video
Indeed!
Is there an UBUNTO VM for the m1ipad?
I am one of the few that is really against an ARM based world. It seems that ARM can really hinder right to repair. You can't just upgrade your ram or hard drive or cpu or gpu or replace them if they go bad. I left Apple when they started soldering every damn component and now you can't even unsolder the component. You basically have to buy a whole new computer since everything is on one chip. I don't care how much more efficient ARM is right now.
We are literally so close to the PC 2.
Unless you're doing CPU intensive stuff all the time, which 99% of the people doesn't, if you're not buying an M1 mac mini thinking the hardware is dated then you're losing on a hidden gem; I’m amazed this thing isn’t more popular. I got one this year with a good discount and I can recommend people to get one with my eyes closed, just get the 16GB version and you're set. It even let me install the OS on an external 2TB NVMe SSD with a thunderbolt enclosure.
look who decided to grow a beard again, welcome back 🎉 !
lol this is the first ad plug i've ever NOT skipped. not buying it, but the dashcam was intriguing
@1:55 Snatchy Labs
I have an M1 Air and a 15W 4700U based laptop. The honest truth is the M1 is slower, yes, if I do something that it specializes in, like the video editing, it is fast.
But if I need to transcode the 4700U is faster. Graphics, AMD is faster, and the power difference is negligible.
I wonder if this machine outperforms my 2011 Intel Core i5 2400
probably, in most workloads