Why won't it use a Jaguar CPU when some of the models in the microarchitecture are
both embeddable and go as low as 3.9W in terms of power consumption? Which part of
"x86_64 is x86_64" is confusing? The Jaguar line was literally designed as AMD's entry into the mobile CPU market and a replacement to the Bobcat series, it
absolutely can be used in mobile devices. For example, the GX-420CA has a BGA size of 24.5mm x 24.5 mm - that's about as big as a Tegra CPU and it needs marginally more power.
Okay, I think I made a confusion.
As Atom CPUs, there are also Jaguar CPUs made for mobile, and those are the ones you're talking about, right?
That could actually be the case, although they could use something better as the Kaveri series.
Prove it.
/fucking retarded argument.
Lets start with the obvious things and work our way down.
Physically different form factors of systems have different ways of interfacing with your motherboard - you can't get a desktop LGA or PGA processor into a smaller laptop socket with a different pinout. Phones and some laptops also use soldered on BGA processors. You'd be trying to fit a 1/4 inch peg into a 1/2 inch hole.
You'd also need 'motherboard' level support - with PCs this would be in the bios/uefi firmware to be able to bootstrap the processor. Intel's sandy bridge and ivy bridge processors shared a socket, and could be swapped between boards of either generation, but sandy bridge boards needed a firmware update. As such your firmware would need to be able to communicate with either.
Secondly, they run different
Instruction Set Architectures . Assuming you had a magical motherboard with a chipset that could speak to both a specific ARM and Intel chip... none of your software would work without a compatibility layer. You could in theory outfit an OS to run software from another architecture, like rosetta, but simply swapping chips would result in breakage in software. And this is assuming a hypothetical magical system, that is compatible with two completely different chip designs!
In short, if you had two chips with ISA compatibility, identical pin outs
and firmware support, you could swap them. If you tried to put an arm chip into a intel board, or a intel processor into a arm phone (which would be monumentally stupid considering phones have soldered on processors), things would very likely not work. Things might burn out since pinouts are different. It simply would be a disaster.
Finally, clock speeds of processors these days has less and less relevance to actual performance. There was a massive dip in processor clock speed post pentium IV on intel processors. Comparing clock speeds is useful within the
same family and generation of processors
taking into account cache and core count. Comparing an arm processor and a intel processor of identical speeds properly would mean throwing carefully designed sets of work at them to see how they perform.
