• gornius@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think ARM is their end goal, it’s really the only option for a handheld console, as today ARM is the only way you’ll get enough performance/power rate to make it both good on battery with good enough performance.

    Win-win for everyone if they invest in an open source x86 to ARM project, similar like they did with Wine.

    • kadu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Switch is more than proof enough that pretty much any modern game engine can compile to an ARM target with zero issues (though Nvidia’s low level APIs help, not sure about Qualcomm).

      But there’s zero chance older PC games would ever be updated, and by older I don’t mean ancient, some AAA studios stop issuing updates in about one year after release.

      So it all comes down to being able to emulate X86 on ARM… The best example we have is Apple, and games run but with a massive performance hit. Microsoft’s implementation is borderline unusable. I’m not sure what to expect from Valve.

      • Dani551@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Checkout Box86/64 and Fex-Emu. They both do x86 translation/emulation on ARM Linux and the results are wayy better than any reasonable expectations I had going in.

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Nah ARM is barely more efficient than X86. As soon as AMD went TSMC 3nm they got almost similar power efficiency. As the Apple M chips.

      Apples “magic sauce” is just being the first one on the new TSMC nodes.

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not sure what point you trying to make. Translation is just one of ways to emulate.

          • uis@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            This… Is not exactly how it works.

            The way windows ABI works is syscalls always should go through dynamic libraries first, while on linux syscalls do syscall instruction/*. How windows syscalls work allows project like WINE just implement those libraries that will do linux syscalls. No instructions translated.

            But with other architectures story is different. You either make instruction decoder for processor, make interpreter or make binary translator. First is itanium-way, second is naive way and third is how everyone does. Third is basically compiling one machine code to another. It has overhead of, well, compiling one machine code to another. And it works badly with other JIT compilers.

            *there is vDSO, which is dynamic library, that implements syscalls like getting time. It is totally optional.