I am curious how AMD sees themselves staying relevant in the value chain as compute is increasingly about cpu cores working with npu cores.

Not all ARM use cases need that, but it would be a huge mistake to not develop integrated options.

And also an opportunity to make adjustments to their business model.

▲

wmf 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

AMD has CPU, GPU, NPU, FPGA, NIC, DPU... They seem well positioned. The Arm ecosystem has everything you could want but Arm themselves are taking some time to create their in-house CPU and TPU.

	▲	Nevermark 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That's good news. A system for customers (and themselves) to conveniently tightly mix and match all those computing modes is a great competitive/value move.

▲

6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

hulitu 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

ARM is an incompatible pile of mess. On an (X86) PC you can tranfer your disk, as it is, to a new X86 architecture and it will run.

On ARM, every processor has its own bootloader, blobs needed for initialisation. Even the systems have different architecture. In the end, you need a special software setup, which is not supported more than a few years. See phones, Raspberry PIs and derivatives, Chromebooks.

	▲	ajxs 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> On an (X86) PC you can tranfer your disk, as it is, to a new X86 architecture and it will run. This is because of a supporting set of standards (BIOS/UEFI/ACPI) that are well-supported on x86 systems, but technically independent of the x86 ISA. BIOS, and the general compatibility you're talking about, is a historical artefact of the IBM PC being so dominant in the market that other companies created compatible computers. UEFI and ACPI actually exist in the ARM ecosystem now. If ARM continues to grow outside of mobile devices, you could eventually see the kind of broad compatibility you're talking about. It's not super likely though. All signs point to the consumer computing ecosystem becoming more closed, rather than more open.