Maanta, inta badan aaladaha kombuyuutarada waxay u badan tahay inay lahaadaan processor-ka isticmaalaya naqshada x86^{(x86 design)} , sida processor-yaasha Intel, ama ARM (Mashiinka RISC Sare) naqshadeynta^{(ARM (Advanced RISC Machine) design)} sida CPU ee casrigaaga ama tablet-kaaga. ARM CPUs sidoo kale waxay ka dhigayaan laptops. 

Maalmahan waxaad kala dooran kartaa kumbuyuutarka leh processor-ka Intel ama AMD ( x86 ) ama aalad leh processor ARM . Marka marka ay timaado ARM vs. Processor- yaasha Intel^(Intel) , kee fiican?

ARM vs. Intel: Asal kala duwan

Intel -ka casriga ah iyo CPU-yada^(CPUs) ARM-ku-saleysan waxay tignoolajiyadooda dib ugu soo celin karaan chips-yadii hore ee kumbiyuutarrada la keenay suuqa horraantii 1980-meeyadii, gaar ahaan Acorn Computers BBC Micro iyo Intel 8088 ee laga helay PC-gii ugu horreeyay ee IBM . Kuwani waxay u gogol xaadhayeen labada naqshadood ee CPU ee ugu waaweyn wakhtiyada casriga ah. 

Waxaa muhiim ah in la ogaado in inta ay leeyihiin laba khad oo horumarsan oo kala duwan, ay ku biiraan waxa aan u isticmaalno CPU-^(CPUs) yadan maanta.

RISC vs CISC

Daboolka hoostiisa, farqiga ugu weyn ee u dhexeeya Intel iyo ARM-based CPU waa nooca tilmaamaha uu qalab kastaa fahmayo. CPU-yada^(CPUs) ku saleysan ARM waa aaladaha RISC (La dhimay Instruction Set Computer)^{(RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computer))} iyo Intel CPUs waa aaladaha CISC (Complex Instruction Set Computer) . Naqshadaynta RISC^(RISC) iyo CISC waxay ku kala duwan yihiin sida soo-saareyaashu u qabsadaan shaqadooda. Intel (iyo AMD ) CPU-yada^(CPUs) waxay adeegsadaan tilmaamaha CISC ee loo yaqaan x86.

Si kastaba ha ahaatee, inta badan xoogooda iyo daciifnimadooda waxay ka yimaadaan xaqiiqda ah in qalabka RISC ay gacanta ku hayaan tilmaamo gaaban, fudud, lebbiska dhererka halka aaladaha CISC ay isku daraan tilmaamo badan oo dheer, tilmaamo adag oo la farsameeyay hal mar.

Waafaqid Software

Processor- yaasha Intel^(Intel) ma fahmi karaan code-ka ARM iyo lidkeeda. Haddaba, nidaamka hawlgalka iyo software waa in si gaar ah loogu qoraa hal nooc oo processor-ka ah. 

Waa suurtagal in software loogu talagalay hal nooc oo CPU ah^(CPU) in lagu shaqeeyo kan kale, laakiin tani badanaa waxay la timaadaa ganaaxyo waaweyn oo ku saabsan waxqabadka iyo waxtar la'aanta. 

Marka laga reebo tan waa Apple's Rosetta 2 software turjumaada code. Caadooyinkooda ARM CPU-yada^{(ARM CPUs)} waxaa si gaar ah loogu nashqadeeyay iyadoo maskaxda lagu hayo Rosetta 2 oo u oggolow meel u dhow fulinta software-ka aan cillad lahayn ee loogu talagalay Macs-ku-saleysan Intel^(Macs) . Guud ahaan^(Overall) , ciqaabta waxqabadka ee Rosetta 2 waa mid hooseeya, halka aysan ahayn mid qumman. 

Tusaalaha caadiga ah ee dheeraadka ah waa aaladaha dusha sare ee ARM ee Microsoft. ^{(ARM-based Surface)}Marka kuwani isku dayaan in ay ku daydaan x86 code-ka, saamaynta wax-qabadku aad buu u daran yahay oo software-ku waxa uu noqon karaa mid aan la isticmaali karin.

Isticmaalka Korontada

Faa'iidada muhiimka ah ee CPU-yada^(CPUs) ku saleysan ARM marka loo eego Intel iyo soo-saareyaasha kale ee x86 waa isticmaalka tamarta. Waxay soo baxday in habka RISC oo ay weheliso hal-abuurnimada gaarka ah ee naqshadaynta ARM ay ka dhigayso CPU-yada^(CPUs) aadka u liita . Tani waa sababta ARM ay u maamusho suuqyada casriga ah iyo kiniiniyada.

Waa sababta aad 24 saacadood ama ka badan uga heli karto taleefankaaga, halka laptop-kaaga Intel oo wata baytarigiisa weyn uu socon karo saacado yar oo keliya, haddii aad nasiib leedahay. Dabcan, haddii aad la socoto M1 Mac , waxaad ku dhowaan kartaa saacadaha 20 ee dib-u-celinta filimada, taas oo ah mid aad u cajiib ah laptop-ka.

Waxqabad saafi ah

Markaad ka saarto isticmaalka tamarta isla'egta, sida kombuyuutarku ku xidhan yahay dhexda dhexe, Intel iyo soo-saareyaasha kale ee x86 CISC waxay ku tumanayaan dhammaan ARM-based RISC CPUs .

Laakiin, maadaama lacag aad u badan ay ku socoto horumarinta ARM CPU iyada oo ay ugu wacan tahay kor u kaca taleefannada casriga ah iyo kumbuyuutarrada, waxqabadka ARM CPUs ayaa si aad ah u kordhayay jiil kasta. 

Taleefannada^(Mid-range) casriga ah ee dhex-dhexaadka ah ayaa hadda ka gudbay heerka "ku filan" marka loo eego awoodda xisaabinta waxayna leeyihiin awood ku filan oo ay ku daboolaan baahiyaha isticmaalaha maalin kasta.

Waxqabadka Per Watt

Haddii aan u beddelno sheekada intee in le'eg ayay ARM CPU u qaban kartaa watt kasta oo tamar ah oo ay isticmaasho, arrimuhu aad uguma muuqdaan x86 Intel CPUs . In kasta oo shirkadaha sida Intel ay si adag u shaqeeyeen si ay u sameeyaan qaabab hufan oo awood leh oo CPU-yadooda ah^(CPUs) , haddana waxa jira farqi.

Tixgeli isbarbardhigga sare. Intel i7-9750H wuxuu leeyahay 45W Thermal Design Power ( TDP ) halka Snapdragon 888 uu leeyahay 10W TDP . Si kastaba ha ahaatee, 888 wuxuu ku yimaadaa meel la gaari karo waxqabadkiisa bartilmaameedka ah.

ARM CPU wali waxay maamushaa in ay u dhigma 75% dhibcaha ugu dambeeya ee laptop-ka Intel CPU marka dhammaan buundooyinka la hawl galo. Maskaxda ku hay in ARM CPU uusan lahayn qaboojin firfircoon oo uu ku dhexjiro taleefanka casriga ah. Qalab weyn oo laptop ah oo leh qaboojin firfircoon iyo in ka badan afar jeer TDP si loo helo faa'iidada waxqabadka yar ee sidan oo kale ah waxay si cad u muujineysaa farqiga waxqabadka-per-watt ee u dhexeeya tignoolajiyadan. 

Astaamaha Muhiimka ah

Faa'iidada xiisaha leh ee dhinaca ARM ee shay waa isticmaalka koojiyeyaasha CPU^{(CPU cores)} asymmetrical . Intel iyo processor-rada kale ee x86 waxay leeyihiin koorayaal badan, laakiin isku mid ah. Si kastaba ha ahaatee, waa wax caadi u ah ARM CPUs inay yeeshaan dhowr, laakiin kala duwan, koofiyado. 

Tusaale ahaan, 8-core ARM CPU ee ku jira talefanka casriga ah waxa laga yaabaa in uu haysto afar koofi oo awood yar ah kuwaas oo si degdeg ah ugu filan hawl maalmeedka sida daalacashada mareegaha, daawashada muqaal, dhageysiga muusiga iyo maaraynta hawlo yar yar. Isla marka aad bilowdo ciyaarta fiidyaha, ama aad bilowdo samaynta shaqada abuurista sida sawir tafatirka, afarta CPUs ee waxqabadka sare leh ayaa soo galaya .

Tani waxay ka dhigan tahay inaad ka faa'iidaysan karto waxqabadka ugu sarreeya ee dillaaca gaagaaban ee loo baahan yahay oo aad sidoo kale ku raaxaysato nolosha batteriga dheer ee celceliska ah ee wareegga kharashka batteriga.

ARM ma mustaqbalka?

Su'aasha ugu weyn ee aan soo bandhignay marka ay timaaddo tignoolajiyadan CPU waxay ahayd " ^(CPU)Waa kee^(Which) kan ugu fiican?" iyo sida aad filan karto jawaabtu waa "waxay ku xiran tahay". Waxaan si hubaal ah u dhihi karnaa waa in x86 Intel (iyo AMD ) CPUs ay xukumaan mar kasta oo awooddu ay tahay arrin aan jirin. Markaa haddii ay gidaarka ku xidhan tahay oo aanu ku tiirsanayn batari si uu u shaqeeyo, kuwani waa CPU-yada^(CPUs) la doonayo.

Maanta, adduunka kombayutarka la qaadi karo, arrimuhu aad uma cadda. Dhibaatada ugu weyn ee ARM^(ARM) maaha wax qabad, laakiin waafaqid software. Tani waa wax ay Apple ku xallisay Rosetta 2 iyo Microsoft waxay u tahay mudnaanta sare. Iyadoo loo maleynayo in software uu ku shaqeyn doono nidaamka ARM iyada oo aan la taaban karin (haddii ay jirto) ciqaabta waxqabadka, waxay bixisaa dheelitirka ugu fiican ee waxqabadka iyo nolosha batteriga.

Markaad si sax ah u sameyso, waxaad heleysaa kumbuyuutar sida M1 MacBook Pro . Way ka awood badan tahay kombuyuutar ujeedo-guud ah oo waxay xitaa qaban kartaa hawlo xirfad leh sida tafatirka fiidyowga^{(video editing)} - heer wax qabad waxay ku sii jiri kartaa saacadaha 20 ee batteriga! Haddii aad rabto macluumaad dheeraad ah oo ku saabsan M1, hubi M1 vs i7: The Benchmark Battles .

ARM vs. Intel Processors: Which Is The Best?

Today, most computing devices are likely to either have a processor using the x86 design, like Intel processors, or the ARM (Advanced RISC Machine) design as in the CPU in your smartphone or tablet. ARM CPUs are also making it into laptops. 

These days you can choose between a computer with an Intel or AMD processor (x86) or a device with an ARM processor. So when it comes to ARM vs. Intel processors, which is better?

ARM vs. Intel: Differing Origins

Modern Intel and ARM-based CPUs can trace their technologies back to early chips in computers brought to market in the early 1980s, specifically the Acorn Computers BBC Micro and the Intel 8088 found in the first IBM PC. These paved the way for the two main CPU designs of modern times. 

It is important to note that while they have two separate evolutionary lines, they converge in what we use these CPUs for today.

RISC vs CISC

Under the hood, the main difference between an Intel and ARM-based CPU is the type of instruction that each device understands. ARM-based CPUs are RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computer) devices and Intel CPUs are CISC (Complex Instruction Set Computer) devices. RISC and CISC designs differ in how processors do their work. In Intel (and AMD) CPUs they use a CISC instruction set known as x86.

However, most of their strengths and weaknesses come from the fact that RISC devices handle short, simple, uniform-length instructions while CISC devices combine many instructions into long, complex instructions processed all at once.

Software Compatibility

Intel processors can’t understand ARM code and vice versa. So, the operating system and software have to be written specifically for one type of processor. 

It is possible for software meant for one type of CPU to be run on the other, but this usually comes with large penalties in performance and inefficiency. 

The exception to this is Apple’s Rosetta 2 code translation software. Their custom ARM CPUs have been designed specifically with Rosetta 2 in mind and allow for near seamless software execution designed for Intel-based Macs. Overall, the performance penalty with Rosetta 2 is low, while not being perfect. 

A more typical example is Microsoft’s ARM-based Surface devices. When these try to run x86 code through emulation, the performance impact is so severe that the software may be unusable.

Power Consumption

The significant advantage of ARM-based CPUs over Intel and other x86 processors is power consumption. It turns out that the RISC approach along with the specific innovation of ARM’s design makes for incredibly frugal CPUs. This is why ARM has dominated the smartphone and tablet markets.

It’s why you can get 24 hours or more from your phone, while your Intel laptop with its larger battery may only last a few hours, if you’re lucky. Of course, if you go with an M1 Mac, you can get close to 20 hours of movie playback, which is very impressive for a laptop.

Pure Performance

When you take power consumption out of the equation, as with a computer plugged into the mains, Intel and other x86 CISC processors stomp all over ARM-based RISC CPUs.

But, since so much money is going into ARM CPU development thanks to the rise of smartphones and tablets, the performance of ARM CPUs has been increasing exponentially with each generation. 

Mid-range smartphones have now passed the “good enough” threshold in terms of computing power and are powerful enough to meet user needs on a day-to-day basis.

Performance Per Watt

If we change the narrative to how much work an ARM CPU can do for every watt of energy it consumes, things don’t look so good for x86 Intel CPUs. Although companies like Intel have worked hard to make power-efficient efficient models of their CPUs, there’s still a gap.

Consider the above comparison. The Intel i7-9750H has a 45W Thermal Design Power (TDP) while the Snapdragon 888 has a 10W TDP. Yet, the 888 comes within reach of it’s benchmark performance.

The ARM CPU still manages to match 75% of the high-end laptop Intel CPU’s score when all scores are engaged. Keep in mind that the ARM CPU has no active cooling and is nestled inside a smartphone. For a large laptop device with active cooling and more than four times the TDP to have such a relatively small performance advantage starkly demonstrates the performance-per-watt difference between these technologies. 

Core Symmetry

An exciting advantage on the ARM side of things is the use of asymmetrical CPU cores. Intel and other x86 processors have multiple, but identical, cores. However, it’s common for ARM CPUs to have multiple, but different, cores. 

For example, an 8-core ARM CPU in a smartphone may have four low-power cores that are fast enough for everyday tasks such as browsing the web, watching a video, listening to music and handling small background tasks. As soon as you start up a video game, or begin doing content creation work like photo editing, the four high-performance CPUs kick in.

This means that you can have the advantage of high peak performance in short bursts as needed and also enjoy long battery life averaged out over a battery charge cycle.

Is ARM the Future?

The main question we posed when it comes to these CPU technologies was “Which is the Best?” and as you might expect the answer is “it depends”. We can say with certainty is that x86 Intel (and AMD) CPUs rule whenever power is a non-issue. So if it’s plugged into the wall and doesn’t rely on a battery to work, these are the CPUs to go for.

Today, in the portable computer world, things aren’t quite as clear. ARM’s biggest drawback isn’t performance, but software compatibility. This is something that Apple has solved with Rosetta 2 and for Microsoft is a high priority. Assuming that software will run on an ARM system without significant (if any) performance penalty, it offers the best balance of performance vs battery life.

When done right, you get a computer such as the M1 MacBook Pro. It is more than powerful enough as a general-purpose computer and can even take on professional tasks such as video editing — a level of performance it can sustain for 20 hours on battery! If you want more information on the M1, check out M1 vs i7: The Benchmark Battles.

Related posts

• Dib u eeg Intel Core i5-10600K: Processor heer-dhexe oo heersare ah!

• Intel NUC10i5FNH dib u eegis: Waxqabadka adag ee qaab yar!

• ADATA XPG Lancer DDR5-5200 RAM dib u eegis: Ku fiican Intel 12th Gen!

• ASUS Transformer Book T300 Chi Review - Muuqaal Wanaagsan ayaa la kulma Intel Core M CPU

• Dib u eegista Intel Core i5-12600K: Ciyaarta dhexda ee ugu fiican sanadkan CPU?

• MSI GE66 Raider 10SGS dib u eegis: Laptop ciyaar xoog leh oo leh naqshad Sci-Fi ah

• 13ka Beddel ee Bilaashka ah ee ugu Fiican Microsoft Visio

• 21 Qalabka Maareynta Wakhtiga ugu Fiican iyo Apps aad u baahan tahay inaad isku daydo

• ASUS VivoWatch SP dib u eegis: Tracker caafimad oo caqli badan oo la xidhi karo oo loogu talagalay geeks!

• realme C21 dib u eegis: taleefanka casriga ah ee aad u hooseeya! -

• ASUS Mini PC PN62 dib u eegis: Kombiyuutar yar oo gacantaada ku habboon!

• 6 Sababood ee AllTrails Pro waxay ugu qalantaa Hikers Avid

• AMD Ryzen 5 5600X dib u eegista: Processor-ka desktop-ka ugu fiican ee ciyaarta? -

• 7 Apps iyo Website-yada ugu Wanaagsan ee Fiidyaha Wada Daawashada

• ASUS Turbo GeForce RTX 3070 dib u eegis: Waxqabadka ciyaaraha aad u fiican

• TP-Link Deco X60 dib u eegis: quruxda quruxda badan waxay la kulmaan Wi-Fi 6!

• 5-ta Apps ee Aqoonsiga Muusiga ee ugu Wanaagsan si aad u Hesho Heeso la mid ah Tune

• 3-da Apps ee ugu Fiican ee Socodka lagu Helo Waddooyinka, Looga Jiro Socodka, oo Aan Lumin

• 5-ta Apps ee ugu Fiican ee Hormarinta Lacagta ah ee iPhone iyo Android

• Dib u eegista Razer Naga Pro: Jiirka ugu sarreeya ee nooc kasta oo ciyaar ah