this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2025
10 points (100.0% liked)

Hardware

3857 readers
161 users here now

All things related to technology hardware, with a focus on computing hardware.


Rules (Click to Expand):

  1. Follow the Lemmy.world Rules - https://mastodon.world/about

  2. Be kind. No bullying, harassment, racism, sexism etc. against other users.

  3. No Spam, illegal content, or NSFW content.

  4. Please stay on topic, adjacent topics (e.g. software) are fine if they are strongly relevant to technology hardware. Another example would be business news for hardware-focused companies.

  5. Please try and post original sources when possible (as opposed to summaries).

  6. If posting an archived version of the article, please include a URL link to the original article in the body of the post.


Some other hardware communities across Lemmy:

Icon by "icon lauk" under CC BY 3.0

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 1 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

This is actually a pretty good and rational change both on in terms of generational naming and core type naming. ARM's generational and SKU branding always felt more confusing than Intel and AMD (and they've done their fair share of tricks with pushing older micro-architecture in newer product series).

In past iterations of Mali you could configure the cores themselves to have different ratios of units in them, especially at the low end where 3D was less of a priority than pixel pushing, think TV/video controllers vs gaming devices. That feature seems to be a thing of the past but most of the low end devices there will probably stick with older GPU families for area and cost savings, if the new features are not going to be used, why pay for them?

I am surprised they didn't offer a G1-Nano option for the their GPUs.