General / Off-Topic The Gadget Show!!

Tom Sloman

T
Yaffle said:
ARM, owner of the IP in ARM chips, the one probably in your mobile phone, is born of Acorn as was. Sophie Wilson, of Acorn and whilst at Acorn did the initial designs. ARM was split out of Acorn in 1990. ARM initially stood for Acorn RISC Machine.

It is likely there is an ARM chip in your phone, or some other device about your home.

My point was to concur, the desktop is nowhere near dead. Nowhere near, but it's not quite right to say Acorn is dead either, it continues in a different guise, much like that employee timekeeping machine manufacturer called IBM.
Click to expand...

In that sense, a small part of the original company survived, but Acorn itself died, as did the entire Acorn desktop computer lineup, and the majority of employees lost their jobs. I was never talking about the small part of it that was broken off from Acorn and basically did nothing for a decade and then came back strong for low power devices like mobile phones, but i understand what you are talking about. I was talking about Acorn computers, which died and never built another desktop PC.

At that time, there were plenty of people saying that Acorn was but the first of many and that it was the end of the desktop computer (yet again). In those days we still read magazines, and they were full of commentary about how desktop computing was over and none of them would survive more than a year or two. Same thing happened when Amiga died, and has happened multiple other times also. I don't think anyone ever actually thought that from the inside, they just knew it would sell stories and make them popular, without actually having to have an idea or do any real work. Pure lazy "journalism".
 

Tom Sloman

T
A quad-core 2.4 GHz Phone ARM CPU is nowhere near the power of a desktop quad-core i7. You do realise that, right? It's not even close.

Although the same design of chip will be faster when you increase the speed of the clock cycles, it is not very useful comparing only the clock cycles across different types of CPU.

Pentium-4 chips went right up to 3.8GHz. A 2.4 GHz i3 is around five times faster than the faster clocked Pentium-4 3.8 GHz, and that i3 uses around half the power and also includes a pretty decent iGPU.

Phones and tablets are primarily concerned with power consumption, and need to be able to run all day on a single charge. The speed is secondary to this. Desktop computers are primarily concerned with being fast, and power consumption doesn't matter because it will be plugged into a wall socket.

Next, the controls are a serious problem. There's no way you'll be able to play a game like ED on a tablet. On top of that, a tiny screen with very limited field of view and no room for radar, maps, comms, etc is just not going to work.

Basically, to realistically think about playing ED on a mobile device, you're looking at the power for drive something like Oculus Rift smoothly, and the ability to connect a decent hardware controller system. I'd say that's a long way off.
 

Beachlight7

Beachlight7
Tom Sloman said:
A quad-core 2.4 GHz Phone ARM CPU is nowhere near the power of a desktop quad-core i7. You do realise that, right? It's not even close.

Although the same design of chip will be faster when you increase the speed of the clock cycles, it is not very useful comparing only the clock cycles across different types of CPU.

Pentium-4 chips went right up to 3.8GHz. A 2.4 GHz i3 is around five times faster than the faster clocked Pentium-4 3.8 GHz, and that i3 uses around half the power and also includes a pretty decent iGPU.

Phones and tablets are primarily concerned with power consumption, and need to be able to run all day on a single charge. The speed is secondary to this. Desktop computers are primarily concerned with being fast, and power consumption doesn't matter because it will be plugged into a wall socket.

Next, the controls are a serious problem. There's no way you'll be able to play a game like ED on a tablet. On top of that, a tiny screen with very limited field of view and no room for radar, maps, comms, etc is just not going to work.

Basically, to realistically think about playing ED on a mobile device, you're looking at the power for drive something like Oculus Rift smoothly, and the ability to connect a decent hardware controller system. I'd say that's a long way off.
Click to expand...

The Elite min specs don't quote an "i" number, so I presume it can be of the lowest spec, as long as it's quad 2.0ghz. ( I have read people have played ED using dual core 2.0ghz PC)
Tegra K1 should also be suitable for Elite performance, and is DX 11.1 compatible.
Can you connect a mouse to a tablet?
 

Rog

Rog
Memnoch said:
Anandtech have a benchmark of the 330 GPU.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7082/...-preview-qualcomm-mobile-development-tablet/6

Around half the speed over an Intel HD 4000 chipset. Does anyone play ED on one of these? I'd be interested to know how it plays.
Click to expand...
When Beta premium arrives, it'll be installed on my lowly i3 laptop with HD4000 integrated graphics, so I'll post. :smilie:

I'm hoping (in vain, almost certainly), that it'll be acceptable with options dialled down for a few months; if not, instant new PC build time!
 

Memnoch

M
Remember that FD have stated the recommended or rather required spec. for Alpha only, and that the requirements may be reduced as further code optimisations come in to play.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom