First Windows 10 on ARM PCs to arrive in the fourth quarter, Qualcomm says

Myerson Windows 10 (Image credit: Daniel Rubino / Windows Central)

Things have been quiet concerning Windows 10 on ARM since Microsoft first announced in December it was in the works, but that will soon change. Qualcomm CEO Steve Mollenkopf has confirmed that the first Windows 10 PC running on a Snapdragon 835 processor is scheduled to arrive during Q4 2017 (via CIO).

Mollenkopf detailed the timeframe in a brief mention as part of Qualcomm's most recent earnings call, as detailed in a transcript posted at Seeking Alpha:

Fifth, we have an opportunity to disrupt the existing suppliers of the PC and the datacenter. Our Snapdragon 835 is expanding into Mobile PC designs running Windows 10, which are scheduled to launch in the fourth calendar quarter this year. In the data center, we announced the collaboration with Microsoft and demonstrated Windows Server Running on our 10 nanometer Qualcomm Centriq processors, the first 10 nanometer server processors in the industry.

The move comes as part of a partnership between Microsoft and Qualcomm, originally outlined at WinHEC, to create what Microsoft is calling "cellular PCs." The ability to run full desktop Windows 10 on ARM represents a huge shift for the platform, as Windows has historically only worked on x86-based chips.

Running on the Snapdragon 835, Windows 10 on ARM will allow full emulation of traditional x86 Win32 apps and games. Given the Snapdragon 835's smartphone roots, we can expect devices running Windows 10 on ARM to come with built-in cellular connectivity, Bluetooth 5, long battery life, and relatively thin and light form factors. Microsoft also confirmed in December that Windows 10 will add support for electronic SIMs (eSIM), with the Windows Store eventually selling 4G LTE data plans.

Windows 10 on ARM: Microsoft's ultimate mobile device vision comes into focus

We haven't heard any official plans for a cellular PC from Microsoft hardware partners like Dell, HP or Lenovo, so it's hard to gauge what type of device Mollenkopf is expecting to arrive in the fourth quarter. That said, whether it be tablets, two-in-ones, or Ultrabooks, the first devices to roll out with Windows 10 on ARM will represent a significant step forward for Microsoft.

Thanks, @Dan12R, for the tip!

Dan Thorp-Lancaster is the Editor in Chief for Windows Central. He began working with Windows Central as a news writer in 2014 and is obsessed with tech of all sorts. You can follow Dan on Twitter @DthorpL and Instagram @heyitsdtl. Got a hot tip? Send it to daniel.thorp-lancaster@futurenet.com.

263 Comments

I'd really like a successor to surface 3 that has stellar battery life. Hope this enables that
Good battery life... and great sleep support! (Like the Surface 2) A dream.
Samsung Book 10.9" is what you are looking for.
If the 10.9 inch had LTE, yea. Looks like just the 12" has LTE and verizon at that. Bleech.
Samsung uses Intel Core M. Im not sure about those new models, but my laptop with core M is just TERRIBLE, its clock is usually down making it slower than a Bay Trail Atom and cannot play any video smoothly, its just a terrible experience.
The experience on my core m powered sp4 has actually been quite good. Much better than i expected.
Mine is the Core M 5Y10 http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-M3-6Y30-vs-Intel-Core-M-5Y10 maybe the better gpu clock speed fixed the Video playback? If thats so i might give it another try...
Surface 3 used Atom, so it's an improvement.
I just want a successor to the Lumia 950XL. "Full" x86 on a phone? Hell yeah.
x86 has awful standby. Hope you like missing texts cause it went into deep sleep. Then all of a sudden it's Microsoft's fault that you wanted a **** processor in a phone. Kill it with fire.
It's x86 emulation, not full time x86
that sounds even worse.
But we'll see
How does that in any way sound worse?
in the emulation way. duh
You're so dumb
no u
QEMU has been emulating x86 on ARM for years. Also when Google finish and move to using Fuchsia for their main OS they too will have to do some sort of emulation for older apps.
It's emulated only when doing Continuum (you know, connecting to a display and input devices and accessing the desktop and it's app, albeit only light to mid-light apps). All phone functionality and day-to-day basic apps should be written in UWP. And since UWP can run natively on ARM, there are no need to be emulated in any way.
What...? So we can't emulate Bluestacks on Windows 10 ARM when it is in phone mode and run Android apps? So there will still be an app gap? Will the Snapdragon processor even be powerful enough to run Bluestacks?
Eh, most people talk about wanting a full x86 processor on their phones when it comes to Windows. If he's talking about the emulation Microsoft is cooking up, my bad and I'm all for that too.
There are tradeoffs with emulation suchas increased cpu cycles and x86 socs have higher tdps than ARM socs. Phones have a confined power budget. So both don't really work for phoned yet. If Microsoft can get emulation working without turning your phone into a mini oven and subsequently cooking your nether regions once you put the phone in your trouser pockets after you've "undocked" your phone then sure why not. IMO if a ARM soc working in tandem with X86 dock is the best way to go about it until x86 soc's tdp is miles better than ARM socs. Never the less, personally I would not want an x86 phone as that opens the door for malware. There is tonne of personal information on phones as opposed to PCs. Plus you can install heavy weight Firewalls and anti-virus applications (some run 13-40 processes - try running these on a phone lol).
Good analysis TechFreak1! Windows Defender works fine though, so IMO, Virus threats aren't going to be a big scare. But yes agreed - we have lot more perfonal stuff on our SmartPhones these days, than our Desktops or Laptops...
Thanks, most people just say they want an x86 phone. Sure that's fine but one needs to consider the pros and cons as well as limitations. This applies to pretty much everything in the technosphere. IMO defender is not adequate for the modern era of computing. However one should use what they are comfortable with first and foremost. There is nothing infuriating for people who don't want constant dialogue boxes asking and alerting you of changes. Personally i prefer that so I know exactly what is running on my PCs.
Defender is fine for 95% of people using Windows. Unless you're going to extremely sketchy sites or downloading things you shouldn't, defender works just fine.
It maybe "adequate or fine" in your eyes for most people. From a security stand point it is not. Why do you defender has always ranked poorly by those who test security and anti-virus suites? Sure in recent times it may have improved but still one should not be relying solely on defender. It's not about shady sites but zero day exploits, browser exploits suchas flash, the list is endless. The amount of malware i have removed with malwarebytes, hitman pro, hijackthis, dedicated rootkit tools etc from PCs solely running security essentials' or defender - far too many to count. You need look beyond what you see and observe :).
The only way for those zero day exploits to be exploited is to use flash or visit a malicious site.
Not exactly, in most cases yes but not all cases.
Those other cases are so far and few inbetween that its not worth the slowdown for me to have other antivirus programs installed.
It may not be worth it to you, but once you've been hit by a ransomware attack through a legit link and a redirect due to a tampered certificate. These things happen, if they did not then there would be no need for "heavy duty firewalls and security suites" however these days PC's (desktops) have plenty of ram and processing power so the only slow down is a fragmented mechanical drive.
I want a successor to the 950XL too - with built-in Continuum!
Agreed! We need the supported apps too! I had a 1520 and miss it since it finally died and forced me to a new platform, cough cough....android/samsung Edge 7 cough! Screen on this phone is nice, but the OS is awful, laggy, horrible battery life, gets hot for no reason, did I mention laggy! Anyone who thinks androids are great is clearly delusional! Mail app isnt anything to write home about, it mutilate contacts on a daily basis all on its own, if you update a contact info, it may or may not save your change.....bring me a new LUMIA!
I know how you feel. For my Android tablet, I installed Outlook for mail/calendar/contact. I can't stand Gmail app and the way it deals with multiple mail accounts forcing you to use as well another mail app to get mail and calendar and contacts from all accounts (unless you have a Nexus then Gmail deals with everything fine).
I'm still happy with my 950. It hasn't been two years yet. I wonder what happened to the 3DCamera capabilty they presented at their Creators presentation? In any event, I WOULD be interested if there is going to be a full Windows 10 phone with massive storage, so I can completely retire my desktop.
Exactly. 7" tablet and a Bluetooth ear piece. Throw a folding keyboard and Arc touch mouse in my pockets and I'm done. Good Bluetooth displays are easy to find at work.
Problem is that the Surface 4 internals would be the same as a putative smaller "Cellular PC" so price disparity will be an issue. Though the Surface design patent with a USB-C port points to a Surface 4
Good battery life and emulation hardly coincide.
Emulation is only when u run x86 apps
How powerful is the 835 compared to a Celeron or an Core i3-7 etc?
This is my ultimate concern. Will it really perform?? Emulating Win32 on ARM seems almost unreal, but then again, there's been some software emulation wizardry these days coming from the Xbox team with Xbox 360 backwards compatibility so I'm really looking forward to the magic :-)
Agreed. Emulating a RISC ISA on CISC at near native speeds is an amazing achievement. Very few people understand what this means and give credit to the Xbox team.
they say "Running on the Snapdragon 835, Windows 10 on ARM will allow full emulation of traditional x86 Win32 apps and games" hmm... this sounds too optimistic... emulation needs very fast HW and I dont believe that a Snap 835 could handle a native x86 app like CAD/Photoshop without problems. Its seems like a PR message but the reality will be something else
When you start talking CAD and Photoshop, you wouldn't even run that on a lower end PC to begin with. I would expect to see something similar in performance to the M3 processors from the SD835, just on a micro size chip.
what? I can run photoshop easily on ATOM or any low end device... it all depends on what kind of job are you doing on the other side what are people expecting to do with W10 on a mobile device??? Because reading the comments I think people are expecting too much. The same thing happened with 950XL and the reality was far far away from it
I would expect that I could retire my desktop . . .if there is at least 512GB storage, and capabilty for more as the Tarabyte SD cards arrive.
Running Photoshop on Windows 10 on ARM was a proof of concept. No one in their right mind will be running Photoshop or Lightroom on such a device.
No one in their right mind will be running Photoshop or Lightroom on such a device
Good thing we are so sane 🤣🤣🙃🙃😵😵
Haha!
kkkkkk
so what will you run on your mobile phone with ARM support? what kind of x86 will you use??? It looks like it will be the same failure as W10M. With the lack off proper app ARM and full W10 will be dead on arrival
I would be running my mobile audio processor software. There are three different ones that i use. All are only available in x86 flavor.
I barely ever need a laptop anymore - continuum can nearly fully replace it for me already. Adding the ability to emulate a handful of programs that don't have UWP apps would be the nail in the coffin. I'd by a Windows 10 on ARM phone and a clamshell dock for it like the HP Elite X3 has and then that's all the device i'd need!
No one in their right mind would do it. But based on their proof of concept you can say that you can.
We'll try it just so we find something to complain about: "performance is really bad, look at how slow Photoshop runs" hehe
I would say it will be at least equal to Lightroom on an Atom, which does work decently for small libraries (done it on a Surface 3)
It is not like all x86 CPU can run those CAD or Photoshop properly either. Can Atom or Celeron or CoreM run CAD or Photoshop properly? Why use those chip which are more costly but run poorly instead using ARM which are way cheaper. I'm pretty sure that SD835 is a lot cheaper than CoreM
yes, ATOM can run photoshop.. it all depends on the image quality... 200mpx photos are overkill but full HD pictures are not a problem... CAD is something else
And for how long is this going to be too good to be true? Within this year? How about next Year? The Following?
The interesting thing is that Desktop CPU's are not gaining much performance each year. This allows more efficient chips (ARM) which have more cores to catch up and to use those "extra" cores to emulate CISC instructions to RISC instructions without losing out on performance.
I read somewhere that this is how the SD835 will run x86 software in Windows on ARM without the expected performance hit one expects with emulation. The 4 low power cores will emulate code while the 4 high powered cores run the software at full clock.
Do not expect high performance from arm emulation, you might be very disappointed. This is specially made for mobile and hardly made for desktop work. More like for presentations office, email, small things like this. Do not expect this low power cpu to be able to surpass a real CPU.
I'm not. But I'm expecting performance to be better than Atom and upto Core-M with this first wave. And it'll only get better with time.
Yeah, but ARM has it's limitations, and i do not think they will ever be able to replace everything in the world, i mean: Windows would have to be rebuild from scratch (again) for us to be able to say that is a successful turn of events, and not only windows but all the Programs and web sites and pretty much everything we know right now, has to change it's structure for arm CPU's to really show their magic. Till then, well it is only emulation, and with it, comes limitations. Now i do not say that ms can't do a great emulation. But will never ever be able to beat those cpu monsters from intel in performance and functionality. Yeah, i know their can be a problem for Intel, ARM might make those normal users to ditch their desktops/laptops for thin ARM systems… not me, but for sure will be many. It is a threat for Intel for sure. Not that they will go broke, but being force to reduce production means more layoffs and other nasty things. So, they should come with an opened arm to ARM technology. But not something that will change the of how a PC works. No matter how good they get. My opinion... And yes, they might be faster then Intels M CPU'S, but with limitations, as i was saying.…
see.. thats the problem. You are expecting too much. I dont think it can beat Core M ... and if it would beat it...... what will you do with such a CPU? Its still far behind from a normal i3/5/7 so you will use it for basic tasks only
"What will you do with such a CPU?" You make it sound like today's Core M is slower than the 2007 Single-Core, Single-Thread Intel Celeron Processor in my old laptop. Edit: And believe it or not, in 2007, that laptop was good enough for basic tasks only. Presentations and such. And believe it or not, one could run Gears of War for PC back then, assuming they had a good enough GPU. HMMMM, I wonder how well a Core-M today, compares to a gaming laptop from 2007? Edit 2: By the way, my Surface Pro 1 can run that game, graphics turned all the way up and playable in 720P. I'm pretty sure today's Core-M GPU is more powerful than my Surface Pro 1's GPU. And since that game is VERY GPU dependent, I'd bet it would run much better on today's Core-M.
I'm pretty sure when they say it allows for full emulation they mean it emulates the entire x32 instruction set, which is why it can run any app or game, but that's to say nothing of the performance.
More likely to be compared to a surface 3 at best. But I would be happy with a 6" Surface in my pocket if it had a sim card in it. I would call it my surface phone lol
This is what I'm expecting. I'm excited for this since a GPD WIN, a 5.5" Atom based gaming device, can run Xbox 360/PS3 PC equivalent games fairly well. I'd expect the the same or better performance with Windows on ARM. I'm excited for this since I feel gaming is the x86 programs that will turn some heads when it comes to mobile platforms. Show a 15 year old someone playing Splinter cell Black List on a phone and they may give up Mario Run to do something like this. This is the only way I see in the near future how Windows on Phones can gain market share. PC gaming.
@Dont Fear the Future, I agree. Microsoft has a market perception of being all about Enterprise... except they also have Xbox. This has always seemed like a huge missed opportunity to leverage that brand and gaming expertise to win support at least from the gaming portion of the consumer market. Having said that, since MS has not done much with that for mobile in the past, I'm not optimistic they'll do that this time. But I do hope for it. From a strategic perspective, it would be smart.
I agree 100%. Microsoft doesn't have an Enterprise problem; they have a consumer problem. They have had XBox for years, but yet they never tied the Xbox to the PC. They finally are now with XBox Play Anywhere game titles. I hope with Windows on ARM and gaming that Microsoft can bring some, "FUN" to Phone Form Factors running Windows. And that could start with older PC games. No other Smartphone could give one such games, and the best part is, these games already exist. There will be no waiting for the developers to make it happen. Personally, I don't think the first Windows on ARM phone from Microsoft should be a Surface Phone in design. I think is should be more like the PGS from PGS Lab: A slider Smartphone form-factor, with physical controlls that would allow one not only to play games poperly on such a device, but also navigate Windows 10 properly too. If only I were the head of their smartphone division. Of coarse we all think that. :)
This! Exactly what I'm expecting as well...
But let they also release really mobile devices - 6" is too much :/
BTW hope that it won't be another Kyocera Echo as everybody expects now ;D https://www.cnet.com/products/kyocera-echo-sprint/review/
Fully Agree! I'd call it my 'Surface Phone' too! :)
If those tasks are required then yes, (surely obviously?), you will need a proper desktop CPU (and even at that a higher tier one). No point dismissing what is a HUGE achievement on the basis of an extreme, niche, use-case. For most users arm emulation on a mobile or tablet will open up new competitively priced devices able to run a much wider range of software and applications.
Most of x86 app running on ARM doesn't need an emulation since the core of Windows 10 is compiled for ARM. All of the API for Win32 is accessible native since it's compiled for ARM. All hardware instructions (like SSE2?) etc has to be emulated I guess but I guess such things isn't available for W10 ARM.
i dont get it one group of people are like: WOOOOOOOOOW we get x86 app on mobile such fantastic information other group is like: hey bro, dont expect anything big just browsing the net, writing emails, youtube etc. so what the hell are we talking about? It will be the same situation as with W10M = lack of app and dont expect the same power as from a desktop pc
However, I can already do most things using Continuum, bypasing my desktop. Once we go full Windows and I can load Quicken and such on my phone, my desktop will become obsolete(because I am not a high graphical user)
They will say that until it's released.......Then the backpedaling will start and say only small x86 programs and light games will be available. Then it will be only NEW programs of x86 specifically written for ToA will be able to be run. See the pattern? just like windows 10 mobile, All windows 8 devices will be able to upgrade, then, it was all windows 8.1 devices with denim. Then it was only certain ones available. Then we have the app projects. All apps available on any other platform can be easily ported to windows and convert into windows design language...then it was just IOS apps able to be ported...then it was NONE!
Or maybe they wanted to do something that did not depend on developers to make it happen; so they made Windows on ARM so all existing x86 software could run on it without depending on developers at all. That is a smart move.
Not sure. But for reference, it's the same chip that's on the Galaxy S8 and S8+
It doesn't matter, pure rendering powering in direct comparison since this will be emulating Windows on x86. We'll have to wait and see
Quite a bit slower. In a comparison between intel core processors and ARM processors each running their native architecture, intel soundly beats arm. Running x86 emulation on ARM will slow it down further. Still, it's a good start and ARM processors will continue to improve.
We can see that in geekbench galaxy s8 gets about 6000 in multicore and my kaby lake i5 gates about 6500
Interesting. Sounds like an 835 powered machine could be ultra portable with decent power.
Their is no comparison. Your assumption is not real. Android is not Windows, and for sure not a desktop system. Not even close to one. Not by far. The way android uses Arm is totally different from the way Windows uses CPU's. Try putting that ARM cpu on a real machine and you will understand what i mean. Not that is not double, as now ms tells us, but for sure will never perform like icore 5 kabylake. And do not forget icore5 is dualcore;) with somekind of emulation tech to work like 4.
You are totally wrong, here. Android is Linux, and Linux can do everything Windows can do, and more. It is also much better performance tuned than Windows, thanks to being open source (even MS acknowledges this). On the same hardware, running the same code, Android will run circles around Windows.
That doesn't explain why Android Phones are sooo sluggish on 1 GB RAM, while Windows 8.1/ 10 Phones absolutely FLY, on Phones with 1 GB RAM... Unless we are saying that Windows the PC OS is far less optimized that LINUX, while Windows the Mobile OS is far better optimized than Android!
I don't know what version of W10 you are running, but on my Lumia 950, W10M runs like a dog. Overall, I find performance on the PRIV, which is exactly the same phone on the inside, to be noticeably better. WP8.1 ran much better, but also couldn't really do anything...
Gonna stop you there. Yes, Win Phone 8.1 did indeed fly on phones with 1GB ram, but Win Mobile 10 does not. It's pretty obvious WM10 needs way more than 1GB, and that could be the reason why MS is dropping support for phones en masse. Won't be surprised if my 640XL doesn't even get RS3 update despite being supported for now.
Power is part of the equation, you need to think about heat dissipation, impact on battery life as running it even continuum mode may run the phone pretty hot due to amount of SOC cycles it will need to drive two screens and emulation at the same time. If they can get the phone to run as cool an icecube, then why not :).
Surface Ultra Mobile confirmed!!
Yes sir.
If only... Maybe in 2-3 years?
Will most likely be announced in the MS fall devices event.
MS is working on three sizes - 6", 10" and 14" initially. 10" and 14" are obviously tablets. The 6" one is interesting It could be a tablet with foldable screen or a phone which can be unfolded into a tablet. The 6" device could come in 2018 if a foldable screen is used. The LG foldable screen which MS has signed up to use won't ship until sometime in 2018. A newer Snapdragon processor (7nm) could also be used instead of SD835.
Any references for all this?
Mary Jo Foley mentioned the three sizes (6", 10", 14") a few times. She mentioned again in the Windows Weekly recently. Her source is Terry Myerson. MS's efforts on Foldable Screen includes the patents they received recently and also the rumor about their interest in LG Foldable Screen which will be delivered next year. https://mspoweruser.com/microsoft-said-one-lgs-first-customers-new-folda...
Have a look at the 2016 movie "I.T." with Pierce Brosnan. At a given point the "bad guy - the IT guy" waves with a foldable smartphone (to impress PB's daughter). Looks very similar to the prototypes MS is showing off in their future vision trailers.......
Hope it won't be just another Kyocera Echo ;)
https://www.cnet.com/products/kyocera-echo-sprint/review/
All still at the Rumors stage, my friend... though I wish it was all true!!
I'm hyped for this but I just can't imagine how should the full Windows 10 look on mobile device? Does it mean having a full desktop with start menu or just live tiles with x32 apps or....man XD
The Windows Shell will adapt to the screen size just as it does now so you shouldn't have to worry about tiny icons on small screens that are too small to read and too hard to accurately touch. It is going to be an interesting Christmas shopping season for Microsoft fans with new Windows 10 devices and a new Xbox.
Yeah. Will be interesting to see. My guess is kinda like Tablet-Mode of Windows 10. A start Menu with just icons/apps. We'll see...
For devices with 6" screens it will have the look of W10M. This will be handled by CShell.
That's what CShell will take care of! W10M-esque when on the phone, regular desktop on your 20' monitor.
Nobody's mentioning phones ATM. At first it will definitely be tablets and "bigger" screens. Phones may or may not come later.
No reason not to include phone capability; it's built into ARM, after all... Whether you prefer to call a 6" device a phone or a tablet is what it amounts to; it'll be capable of making calls nonetheless. Just like the first Galaxy Tab, by the way...
CShell. when on small screen, looks like W10M, when hooked up to a bigger monitor, looks like a regular W10 machine. It should be seamless experience.
It will look just like WM10 when screen size is less than 6". Becomes the desktop when the phone is opened into tablet mode.
There has been no indication it will support screens smaller than 6".
There has been no indications that it won't neither (or did I miss the info about that)
"Microsoft is walking the Intel-ARM tightrope, by trying to make it clear that Windows 10 on ARM is meant for a specific class of devices, namely mobile PCs of the greater than 6-inch screen variety. Microsoft will be offering Windows 10 on Qualcomm to OEMs across a variety of categories, including 6-, 10-, and 14-inch categories, Myerson told me."
http://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-to-pc-makers-lets-make-some-windo...
Well it will be like the Windows 10 Tablet mode - not the Desktop Mode. Thats for sure!
Guess we'll have to wait and see. I know, the waiting game is unbearable, but oh well. Maybe it's only gonna work when it's plugged to a docking station. Maybe it will allow you to launch x86 apps even without being docked. We don't know. I sure as hell would buy another WM phone if it could, cos that would mean full time Firefox and never having to look at Edge again. Otherwise... pretty much no other option for my next phone than Android.
Not holding my breath...
Good. Because Q4 is a while away. Much more than 1-2 minutes ;)
12hours battery for netbook or tablets, FTW
Surface Book is already doing more than that. Will be aweomse to see how much they can push this!!
The key here is the huge potential to reach 12 hour battery runtime or more consistently in a smaller package, assuming that by that time Windows 10 will be also highly optimized in addition to that (which can be more). Surface Book literally just have two battery packs which have really higher total battery capacity. With ARM, we will have very thin and light devices and still yet offering better battery life than current Windows tablets. This is exciting to see indeed!
For the Surface Pro 2 you could attach a MS battery powered typing cover almost doubling autonomy.
The moment I saw "Emulation", I lost interest.
Agreed. It's neat to act as a stopgap method to get an app that isn't cross compiled in the Windows 10 Store, but that's all it is to me.
You do know that's what's enabling the Xbox One to be able to play Xbox 360 games, right? It brought great results and is one of the main selling features of the Xbox platform now. Not saying it will have the same attractiveness for Windows. But it's not worthy of an automatic loss of interest in my opinion.
I'm very interested to see how the emulation works out, especially since Qualcomm is working closely with Microsoft.
You know what this means right? the end of Intel monopoly on desktop apps. With Windows 10 on ARM you can finally run x64 and Win32 programs on an ARM device which ends up in saving electricity costs and saving Planet Earth in long term. This is no planned to substitute your workstation at Work with QuadCore Intel Core i7 CPU, this is like the successor of Atom CPU from Intel which Intel cancelled further development.
No, you cannot run x64 programs. Only Win32 x86 programs.
I bet you can run x64. It's an x64 chip.
Firstly, the Snapdragon is not an x64. It is an ARM64. Totally different architecture. Secondly, x64 programs are 64-bit. All the articles, including those on Windows Central, stated that Windows on ARM will only emulate the x86 Win32 programs, which are 32-bit. I don't know where and how you guys think it will support x64 (64-bit) programs.
So to my knowledge, nothing has been said about the emulation only being for 32-bit programs, only that WoA is emulating x86 architecture (which includes both 32- and 64-bit variants). However, you are correct in that x86 is the nomenclature used traditionally for 32-bit programs on Windows, but that may not be the case. If Microsoft has confirmed 32-bit only, please show source!
x86 architecture is 32-bit (16-bit too, but that is obsolete).
x86-64 (or x64) is the 64-bit. And if that is not enough, many of the articles, including Windows Central articles, also stated Win32 in addition to x86. Win32 is the set of Windows APIs used for developing 32-bit programs. This article itself even stated
"Running on the Snapdragon 835, Windows 10 on ARM will allow full emulation of traditional x86 Win32 apps and games".
@myfyp2, that may well be the case, though if it's an emulator, it's not much additional work to support x64 if it already handles x86. That said, I'm also not sure it matters at all. The ONLY difference between them that's visible to a user is access to more than 4GB of RAM. Most of us only run the 32-bit version of Office. And while there are many programs available in x64 versions, pretty much all of them are also in x86 (32-bit) versions. The real benefit of 64-bit is at the OS level so the OS can take advantage of more than 4GB of RAM, that's plenty for individual apps, with the exception of some 64-bit only games that want all that RAM (not going to run acceptably on low-end hardware like this anyway). Bottom line: While I don't think we can rule out definitively that this won't support x64 emulation also, I don't think it matters very much. We don't really need emulation to support 64 bit apps, as long as the OS supports 64-bit to manage a larger total memory space.
I would think since the new devices will be available in the fourth quarter, there is not enough time to add support for emulating x64 instructions. Perhaps next major WoA upgrade or something. I agree the lack of support for x64 programs now is not a big deal. There are very few x64 exclusive programs. Even the latest Visual Studio is 32-bit if I remember correctly.
@myfyp2, good point on there not being timing to add x64 at this point. I probably agree with that. My thinking was that we've not heard definitively that the Windows on ARM emulation will only support x86 (32-bit) and not x64, but I would acknowledge it seems more likely that it will only be 32-bit Winows apps.
So why put in 6 GB into the device, if it is only going to run Win32, which can access up to 4 GB alone? Especially since Windows Mobile (without Win32) works so very well even on 1 GB RAM?
For the OS and native ARM64 apps.
@Surendran Nambiath, as myfyp2 said, for the OS and native apps. The 32 bit apps each run in their own memory space. Even though each indiivdual app can only access 4GB if it's 32 bit, if it's running on a 64bit OS with, say, 12 GB of RAM, then multiple apps could run with GB of dedicated RAM per app. It's the OS that needs to be able to address all 12GB RAM in order to provide up to 4GB to each 32bit app. This is the same thing on your desktop PC (whether Mac, Windows, or Linux). For example I'm writing this on a computer with a pretty hefty 48GB RAM. If the Windows 10 OS itself is using 3GB, that leaves 45GB for applications. If each of those applacitons were 32-bit and needed 2GB of RAM to itself, I could run 22 (45 / 2) of them before anything would slow down to cache out to the hard drive. If the OS is 32-bit, because it can't address more than 4GB, then all apps have to live within that same 4GB of RAM (minus the amount needed for the OS itself). The way people are able to get with this at all, is because it swaps memory in and out through the hard drive cache. But because that's much slower than native RAM, this makes those systems feel very slow. As I hope that helps explain, the real benefit of a 64-bit OS is the ability to include much higher amoun