> The benefit of ARM is scale of multitasking due to not requiring the same kind of lock states that Intel's architecture requires
I have no idea what you mean by this. The only x86 feature I can think of that might qualify as a 'lock state' is a bus lock that happens when an atomic read-modify-write operation is split over two cache lines. That has a very simple solution ('don't do that'--you have no reason to), and anyway, one can imagine more efficient implementation strategies
> can additionally scale much better than only one physical+virtual core pair
I have no idea what you mean by this either. Wider hyperthreading? It can be worthwhile for some workloads (and e.g. some ibm cpus have 4-way hyperthreading), but is not a panacea; there are tradeoffs involved.
I have no idea what you mean by this. The only x86 feature I can think of that might qualify as a 'lock state' is a bus lock that happens when an atomic read-modify-write operation is split over two cache lines. That has a very simple solution ('don't do that'--you have no reason to), and anyway, one can imagine more efficient implementation strategies
> can additionally scale much better than only one physical+virtual core pair
I have no idea what you mean by this either. Wider hyperthreading? It can be worthwhile for some workloads (and e.g. some ibm cpus have 4-way hyperthreading), but is not a panacea; there are tradeoffs involved.