Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft Benchmarks Upcoming AMD Milan-X CPU

techcommunity.microsoft.com

31–34 of 34 posts

Re: Microsoft Benchmarks Upcoming AMD Milan-X CPU

#31
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When did Microsoft not "support" AMD CPUs? It truly would not make any difference if Microsoft "supported" the M1 CPU, as Apple does not sell it to anyone without the rest of Apple computer attached to it. I mean, you can run Windows VMs on M1 computers now, with something like Parallels. But perhaps not more directly, as with Boot Camp? > I would like to see how AMD and Intel can do to change this performance game W…

K6 ? AFAIK "Wintel " is not a joke. MS only cares about intel.

Don't you know AMD64? Microsoft's AMD64 adoption makes Intel to support IA-32e.

Re: Microsoft Benchmarks Upcoming AMD Milan-X CPU

#32
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple Services aren't the same as their hardware.

Well, no shit. I was pointing out that they're placing more and more importance on being a services company rather than a hardware/product company. As that emphasis on services grows they'll probably switch to their own silicon for their cloud stuff which their services will run on.

And I was making the point they aren't even a player on the services market, regardless what their servers run on.

Re: Microsoft Benchmarks Upcoming AMD Milan-X CPU

#33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But perhaps not more directly, as with Boot Camp? https://www.forbes.com/sites/dwightsilverman/2021/04/14/you-... Obviously you have to run ARM Windows, but it’s indeed Windows.

If I understand this article correctly, as of April 2021, you can run Windows on ARM under Parallels virtualization software, which is a Virtual Machine, or VM. So that's not direct to hardware, which I thought Boot Camp was?

Boot Camp is direct on hardware indeed. VMs cover a significant proportion of the gap however.

Re: Microsoft Benchmarks Upcoming AMD Milan-X CPU

#34
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, no shit. I was pointing out that they're placing more and more importance on being a services company rather than a hardware/product company. As that emphasis on services grows they'll probably switch to their own silicon for their cloud stuff which their services will run on.

And I was making the point they aren't even a player on the services market, regardless what their servers run on.

lol what makes you say that? I'd consider apple TV, apple music, apple maps, etc all as services. What is your definition of "services" and do the ones I listed fall into your definition.
Post reply on HN