Why intel lost mobile SOC/ processor market to ARM

Intel cpu’s have CISC whereas ARM cpu’s have RISC architecture. A CISC ( complex instruction set computuing) cpu is more complex to design, takes up more space (silicon die area) and so requires more power whereas RISC ( reduced instruction set computing), which is new, as compared to CISC, is not so complex to design , takes up low space and uses less power.




You can say ISA make insignifacant difference to performance and power but it does make to some extent (If (in RISC) pipelining and microcontroller is optimised, however, RISC also has a disadvantage that softwares takes up more RAM).
ARM cores energy efficiency is strenghtened by technologies such as ‘BIG.little’ and now ‘dynamiq’. No other SOC or CPU vendor has developed such technologies.
There is always a tradeoff between performance and power. Processors are more optimise either for performance or power. If you under clock your processor you may save some battery but again this will decrease performance. If you keep increasing it, it will give you diminishing return. The only solution to this is increase the IPC, balance pipeline, increase cache-size and type etc. But this will increase the cost. Intel can make processor that can compete ARM in terms of performance but was not able to compete because:



1) Soc ’s cost- Arm has risc ISA that takes very less silicon space and brings cost advantage.

2) No. Of software- The no. Of softwares written for Arm are more so that the user will always go for arm cpu. You can make some of the software written for arm work on the intel but not all and again the software written for Arm ISA are optimsed for Arm ISA and if you run them on intel soc they will be having performance issues.

3) Innovation and R&D- Arm continually updates (on yearly cadence) its cpu Microarchitecture and gpu and continues to introduce newer technologies to improve performance and efficiency.
E.g.

• Technology- BIG.little and now dynamiq.
• High performance core- A73 core and now A76 core.
• Efficient core- A53 and now A55

It enjoys a distinctive advantage over other processor manufacturer as it just only have to focus on processor Architecture and design. It doesn’t have to focus on processor mass production technologies (EUV) and designing manufacturing process (10nm, 7nm) like intel. Since android is ubiquitous they gather a good amount of money through licensing only to spend on Architecture R&D.

4) co components- A SOC is different from processor as it not only have processor and associated components but also have GPU, DSP, ISP, LTE MODEM, WIFI MODEM, and other components to increase performance/ efficiency or to introduce newer technologies. Intel doesn’t even have a mobile gpu of its own (for android). It was using imagination’s gpu and unknown integrated modem. All this increases cost and makes intel SOC costly. So why would other manufacturer will go for intel when there is better, cheaper processor offering like snapdragon?

5) Indistnictiveness- Dude, it’s (android market) not a monopoly it’s a perfect competition. If you have read economics, you will be knowing that in a perfect competition market - all good are close substitute of each other and producer employ different startegies like advertising, good after sale service, good packaging etc. to distinguish their product. Qulacomm offers various technologies such as qualcomm true signal antenna boost, qualcomm quick charge, qualcomm hexagon dsp, spectra ISP, qualcomm kryo core etc. that makes its processor distinct (same is the case with mediatek, huawei and samsung processors). In other words intel does not have anything good that sets it processor apart and make it stand out from the crowd.




6) Enery efficiency - Although intel SOC can compete with ARM SOC in ‘performance’, they are dead against ARM when its come to energy efficiency. Aided by the Big.little technology and now its newly- developed replacement ‘dynamiq’, ARM cores consumes less power. To give you an example, ARM cores can consume power in ‘milliwatts’.

As you can see even its high- performance core ‘A75’ can consume power in milliwatts (depending upon manufacturing process, clock speed, software and driver optimisation etc.).