[matt john2]

(I'm sorry I'm totally noob in this)
I read some news, Intel atom x3 series could be the future processors of windows phones, is it a better choice? What are the known/possible advantages over the other? I also read some comments that it is not powerful as the present competing mobile processors is it true?



Cheers,
Matt

[Aziz Abdurachman]

I think Intel processor is best processor for x86 architecture, it's like language of the machine. For mobile phone usually have ARM architecture. Different architecture need different software coding, and majority of mobile apps is using ARM. So that is the cons.
Also Atom use different GPU, and can't use Adreno that some says it can give best result for gaming. cmiiw

[a5cent]

I disagree with Aziz. I'd characterize it as follows:
End-user advantages over ARM:
Compatibility with all desktop software. This is a requirement for everyone interested in the "dockable full desktop in your pocket" vision.
End-user disadvantages:
In theory none, IF the hardware performs similarly to Qualcomm's and offers the same features. That's a big IF however. Note also that any differences in features necessarily leads to fragmentation, as some OS features may then be limited to either Snapdragon or Atom SoCs.
Advantages / Disadvantages for developers:
None.
Disadvantage for MS:
Far more work. IMHO Intel would have to have something truly amazing up their sleeves to make this worth MS' while. Adapting an OS to a completely different hardware platform is insanely expensive, and that price must be paid over and over again, as all OS advancements must then be implemented and kept in sync on both platforms. It's not impossible, but I doubt we'll see this anytime soon.

[Darthbobcat]

I disagree with Aziz. I'd characterize it as follows:
End-user advantages over ARM:
Compatibility with all desktop software. This is a requirement for everyone interested in the "dockable full desktop in your pocket" vision.
End-user disadvantages:
In theory none, IF the hardware performs similarly to Qualcomm's and offers the same features. That's a big IF however. Note also that any differences in features necessarily leads to fragmentation, as some OS features may then be limited to either Snapdragon or Atom SoCs.
Advantages / Disadvantages for developers:
None.
Disadvantage for MS:
Far more work. IMHO Intel would have to have something truly amazing up their sleeves to make this worth MS' while. Adapting an OS to a completely different hardware platform is insanely expensive, and that price must be paid over and over again, as all OS advancements must then be implemented and kept in sync on both platforms. It's not impossible, but I doubt we'll see this anytime soon.

My understanding of the state of Intel's chips is that they have great mobile processers offered at extremely aggressive price points, which has let them snag a big chunk of the Android tablet market in 2014 (and all of the Windows tablet market aside from the now defunct Surface 2 and Nokia 2520 in the same year), but they haven't come out with anything with a truly wonderful integrated 4G LTE radio (I think radio is the right term, if not, receiver, chip, whatevs) to match what Qualcomm does. They've had some atom chips for cell phones with good 3G chips, which has let them seize a very small number of phone manufacturing slots in certain overseas Android phones. But in 2015, the analysis I've read hasn't seen them having anything REALLY astounding that would make it worth it for Microsoft to break away from their Qualcomm partnership. And if I'm not mistaken, all of those "cookie cutter" reference phones we've seen from different OEM's were made at least partially with Qualcomm's help, so why rock the boat there?