ARM Poised To Join Netbook Craze

[Hooch Tan]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://gigaom.com/2009/01/06/netbooks-and-the-death-of-x86-computing/' target='_blank'>http://gigaom.com/2009/01/06/netboo...-x86-computing/</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"Freescale said Monday it would offer an ARM-based chip that could lead to a $200 Linux-based netbook, offering about twice the amount of usage on a single battery charge as Intel&rsquo;s Atom processor allows. Freescale&rsquo;s efforts are nothing new (only AMD has so far stayed above the netbook fray), but it did get me thinking about how Intel&rsquo;s endless pushing of netbooks has, ironically, helped destroy the hegemony of x86 machines for personal computing."</em></p><p>Up until now, netbooks are powered by the x86 legacy.&nbsp; Gigaom notes that Freescale is looking to change that.&nbsp; I've seen hints of some manufacturers in China producing ARM based netbooks as well, this news might help push major manufacturers to join in.&nbsp; The lower power nature of ARM based CPUs is certainly welcome, I've yet to see any ARM based computing device provide a comparable browsing experience.&nbsp; This includes the iPhone, Nokia N810 and WinMo devices.&nbsp; The extra power that an x86 CPU uses, in the overall power consumption of a netbook, is more than offset by the speed at which it renders webpages.&nbsp; Still, I welcome the competition as I'm sure that ARM devices, netbooks or otherwise, will eventually catch up in speed to x86 netbooks.</p>

[Stinger]

ARM's new A9 chip looks very good. Multi-core, decent speeds and very little power consumptions. I'm sure that I read somewhere that their current chips are ten times less power hungry that Intel's Atom chip.

However, I'm guessing that only Linux supports ARM and these days most netbooks being sold run Windows.

[whydidnt]

The more competition the better. My experience so far is that most ARM chips don't provide the browsing experience that you can get with an x86 chip. They are too slow. Maybe this new generation will change that. The other obstacle will be Linux vs. Windows. With the current generation of netbooks, consumers have overwhelmingly preferred XP over any variety of Linux, despite a slightly higher cost. Will the same hold true when the cost difference is $150, instead of $50? I'm not sure.

[Jason Dunn]

Will the same hold true when the cost difference is $150, instead of $50? I'm not sure.

Maybe, but I wonder how much is really the Windows license and the Atom CPU? I'd be shocked it if were more than $50 total, but I have nothing to back that up with. To get to a price difference of $150, I think there'd need to be some other significant changes in the hardware...

[David Tucker]

The ARM architecture is pretty solid...more competition is always a good thing.

[whydidnt]

Maybe, but I wonder how much is really the Windows license and the Atom CPU? I'd be shocked it if were more than $50 total, but I have nothing to back that up with. To get to a price difference of $150, I think there'd need to be some other significant changes in the hardware...

Yes, but they have already established a $50/difference to go from Linux to XP, so we really are looking at the difference from ARM to Atom. Then you have to look at the cost of things like the motherboard, any necessary add-on radio's and memory etc. If the ARM chip has those build in while Atom doesn't then that adds to the difference. I'm pretty sure that the current Qualcomm chips build in a lot of the peripheral stuff, so you don't need separate chips for those, not sure if the x86 Atom does the same. Of course, whatever the difference in cost is, you'll have to add about 40% to the end result to the MSRP for the manufacturer's margin.

I picked the $150/difference because ARM is saying a $200 netbook will be reality, and I think we see $350 for the current Atom powered netooks on the low end.