Mobile internet access has come of age. No more squinting at the tiny screen on your smartphone. No more flat batteries on your laptop.

With the mobile internet device (MID), you can enjoy an always-on connection, long battery life and a decent-sized screen, all in a package that will fit in your pocket. However, are the processors currently used in smartphones or the x86 chips that power laptops capable of providing all this, or will the MID require a totally new processor?

Intel, VIA and ARM are already promoting their wares in a new round of processor wars. So if you're in the market for a MID, should you be looking for that 'Intel Inside' sticker – or does the competition have a trick or two up its sleeve?

What is a MID?

What do we mean by the term MID, and how does it differ from the smartphone, the laptop and other in-between devices – such as the UMPC (ultra-mobile PC)? PC Plus magazine asked the main suppliers of MID processors to define the platform.

According to Pankaj Kedia, Intel's Director of Global Ecosystem Programs for MIDs, "Mobile internet devices represent a category of truly mobile consumer devices that enable the best internet experience in your pocket and allow users to communicate, entertain, access information and be productive. The MID category is comprised of mobile devices with a display size no larger than six inches and a simplified user interface. There are expected to be over 100 million units in the range over the next three to five years."

Timothy Brown, International Marketing Manager for VIA Technologies, offered more in the way of technical detail. "For VIA, a MID is a five-inch form factor or less device that runs on an x86 architecture platform providing the capability of a full internet and computing experience to users. That includes the full Windows Vista, XP and Linux operating systems, the massive body of software developed for those operating systems and the ability to connect and interact with the internet anywhere at any time."

However, Bob Morris, ARM's Director of Mobile Computing, had different views – almost to the point of not recognising the MID as a unique platform in its own right. "Intel coined the term MID. ARM would prefer to call it mobile internet (MI) since there is not one device but many." Morris suggested that within the next five years internet connectivity will become an essential element of a wide range of mobile devices including portable media players (PMPs), personal navigation devices (PNDs), and smartphones.

To make the point, he showed us an illustration that explained how each of these types of device had migrated to the mobile internet arena. In the area of PMPs, the Apple iPod was shown migrating to the iPod Touch with the addition of Wi-Fi; with PNDs, the forthcoming Garmin NuviPhone was shown as the Nuvi Navigator (a sat nav device) with the addition of a 3.5G mobile phone and browser; and in the realm of smartphones, the Samsung Instinct has been augmented with EV-DO technology (or 3G broadband).

The Intel Atom

Although other companies may be developing processors that could form the basis of a MID, to date only three companies have nailed their colours to the mast. We asked these three companies – Intel, VIA and ARM – to tell us about the processors they're promoting for the up-and-coming MID platform. As it's the processor that's had the lion's share of the media coverage, we'll start by looking at Intel's offering.

Intel announced the Atom processor family (formerly codenamed Silverthorn) at the Intel Developer Forum in Shanghai in April, and subsequently rolled out five variants. The Atom processor is Intel's smallest – and, it claims, the world's fastest – chip to consume less than three Watts of power. Ranging from 800MHz to 1.86GHz, the chips are quoted as consuming between 160mW and 220mW on average and from 80mW to 100mW while idling.

The Atom processor is based on the Intel Atom micro-architecture, which was designed to achieve high effi ciency in terms of performanceper- Watt while maintaining full compatibility with the Core 2 Duo instruction set and architectural features such as HyperThreading, Virtualization technology and Intel Digital Media Boost (SSE3). It's currently based on the 45nm high-k process, but it will shrink to 32nm in 2009. Low power consumption is achieved using a range of power management techniques.

Competition from VIA and ARM

According to Brown, VIA's current products aimed at the MID market are based on the C7-M ULV processor. The VIA C7-M ULV provides x86 support via an in-order execution architecture and is offered in clockspeeds of 1.0GHz, 1.2GHz and 1.5GHz. VIA claims that this provides enough processing power to run devices based on full operating systems such as Windows Vista, XP or a mainstream Linux distribution. Like the Intel Atom, high performance-per-Watt is stressed, with power consumption figures ranging from 3.5W to 7.5W.

However, while Intel quotes average power consumption figures (which take into account the fact that the processor will often be idling), figures for the C7-M LV look much higher. This is because they relate to operational power. In reality, the two families are closer together than the figures alone suggest, although comparisons of average power will have to wait for the launch of the MID platform in numbers, when a comparison of performance-per-Watt will be much easier to establish.

Interestingly, there was no mention of a Nano derivative, despite previous indications from a senior VIA spokesperson that it would be used in this context. If and when a sufficiently low-powered version of the processor does become available, it shows every sign of being the first MID processor to feature potentially more efficient out-of-order execution.

Today, it's ARM's V6 architecture devices – such as the ARM11 – that power the Nokia N810, iPod Touch, and smartphones like the iPhone, all of which ARM consider to be MIDs. The architecture will continue to be used in new products of this type. However, for mini-notebooks and platforms closer to what most people think of as MIDs, processors with ARM's next generation V7 architecture, which includes the Cortex-A8, are being promoted.

The main difference between the ARM11 and Cortex-A8 is performance – ARM's figures show the Cortex-A8 achieving about twice the amount of work for the same clockspeed. This has an obvious benefit in terms of the all-important performance-per-Watt. ARM says that the Cortex-A8 range will start showing up in third-party products later this year. ARM claims that the Cortex-A8 has similar clock-for-clock performance as Intel's Atom, and that in addition to Windows Mobile, it can run the full desktop Linux operating system.

It's said to scale in speed from 600MHz to greater than 1GHz and offers a number of architectural features perhaps unfamiliar to those who are more used to looking at Intel data sheets. This includes Neon technology for multimedia and signal processing, Jazelle RCT (Real-time Compilation Target) technology for efficient support of both ahead-of-time and just-in-time compilation of Java and other bytecode languages, and Thumb-2 technology for enhanced code density and performance.

ARM claims that this new processor can meet the performance requirements of mobile devices with a power budget of less than 300mW. As in the case of Intel's figures, this is an estimated in-use average rather than a peak power consumption figure. Where the Cortex A8 differs from both the Atom and VIA's C7-M ULV, however, is its lack of x86 support.

It's important to note that ARM's product is quite different from those offered by Intel or VIA. Whereas these latter two companies are selling chips – that is, pieces of silicon – ARM is licensing processor cores that their silicon partners, which include TI, Qualcomm, Samsung, Nvidia, Freescale, Marvell and Broadcom, integrate into a SoC (System-on-Chip) that is then sold to MID manufacturers.

Mobility requirements

So, what should we be looking for in a processor designed to power a MID? In a sense, it's a bit early to come up with a proper answer, since MIDs have yet to appear in any number and the platform will undoubtedly evolve in the early days as it becomes established in the marketplace. Even so, we took the opportunity to ask the three protagonists what they considered to be the key requirements of a MID processor.

According to Intel, a MID processor needs to be powerful, compatible and frugal in its power consumption. Performance is required to provide the user with an Internet experience in its entirety which, according to Kedia, is "rich, dynamic, immediate, interactive, increasingly user-generated and fast."

To achieve this, the processor must be fully compatible with Internet technologies, including support for the wide range of codecs such as Adobe Flash, plug-ins such as JavaScript, media players and web technologies such as AJAX and XML. Kedia also stressed dramatically low power consumption, a small form factor and a long battery life. Atom processors, it was unsurprisingly suggested, strike a good balance across these three broad requirements.

VIA also saw a need for balance between the processor's power consumption and its ability to provide enough raw performance for a satisfying user experience. For Brown, however, the Internet experience is only the start. VIA also anticipates a requirement for a high standard of media playback and, in the case of business users, the ability to use the standard office applications familiar from the desktop PC environment.

Predictably enough, ARM also cited performance and power consumption as the key features. Performance should enable Internet access, multimedia applications including 3D graphics and HD playback and productivity solutions, while the level of power consumption should permit a full day of use. Ideally, power-use in standby should allow for a battery life measured in days rather than hours.

Laptop meets smartphone

In many ways, a MID could be thought of as occupying the middle ground between a laptop and a smartphone. So it's perhaps not surprising that two of the main suppliers of processors for MIDs have interests in traditional markets at these two extremes. So which approach is likely to be more relevant to the newly-emerging platform – Intel's PC-centric background or ARM's low-power mobile emphasis? We asked each manufacturer to say why they believed their traditional market is better suited to providing successful MID processors.

Intel addressed the question by reiterating the view that performance and compatibility are essential. "We believe that shrinking the x86 processor to reduce power and size while maintaining high performance and software compatibility is the optimal way to bring the Internet to pocketable devices," said Kedia. Intel's design and architecture, 45nm process and pioneering work in power management were all quoted as key strengths in this respect.

Interestingly, Morris didn't altogether agree with our analysis that ARM would consider its own background in low-power portable devices as more suited to addressing the needs of a MID. "ARM thinks companies coming from both markets will be able to define and develop products," he said.

As evidence for this stance, he indicated that ARM is finding that the major OEMs are not so hung-up as they once were over the particular processor in a device, but care more about whether the platform provides a good mobile Internet experience. "An x86 processor is not required for computing tasks," he said. "This is enabling companies to think beyond one or two partners, which bodes well for ARM because our mobile partners can expand their business while new ARM partners from the laptop market are set free to develop cool new products and technology."

VIA's Brown was not convinced that experience from the mobile phone (ARM processor camp) and PC (x86 processor camp) markets alone would necessarily provide the expertise to produce successful MIDs. He characterised the situation as the ARM camp needing to scale up in terms of raw performance and software application development, and the x86 camp needing to scale down in terms of power consumption and an improvement in the software interface for small devices. He was bullish about VIA's chances of squaring this circle and getting the balance right. "At VIA," he said, "we can see very clearly our path to scaling down the power draw, as that has been our expertise and main focus of our x86 processing business over the last eight years."

The x86 compatibility issue

In the realm of PCs, support for the x86 architecture is considered essential. What about MIDs? Will this established processor family remain dominant, or does a new platform demand a new architecture? We asked each of the manufacturers why, if at all, they thought x86 support was imperative. As you can imagine, views were divided.

Intel's Kedia stated quite categorically that "for mobile Internet devices to run the internet as we know and love it today, x86 is essential. Intel Atom processors, which are Core 2 Duo-compatible and fully x86-compliant, deliver the performance and compatibility to run the internet in its entirety." His second argument related to compatibility. "The Internet has been written on the x86 PC for the x86 PC since 1994," he claimed. "Today, over five billion websites are optimised to run in this environment. An x86 PC supports a myriad of codecs, plugins, extensions, media players and latest web technologies. And these technologies and standards continue to evolve as the innovation on the Internet continues."

While there's a great deal of truth in this assertion, it's pertinent to point out that users of non-Windows operating systems such as Linux, Unix variants and Mac OS X – which use both x86 and non-x86 processors – all enjoy good levels of web support, which suggests that there's nothing that makes the x86 architecture particularly suited to web applications. More relevant perhaps is the commercial decision to support a platform. History suggests that software houses will back a platform if it gains a significant foothold in the market, whatever its technological capabilities.

As another supplier of x86 chips, VIA's Timothy Brown was equally predictable in his response, suggesting that raw performance and software compatibility demanded the use of x86 architecture.

Morris had a radically different take on the question. "Support for x86 is essential only if you want to run Windows XP or Vista", he said. "It's clear that the web is not hardware architecture dependent. With Adobe's Open Screen Project and Microsoft's Silverlight (a cross-browser, crossplatform, and cross-device plug-in for delivering media and interactive applications to the web), ARM is well on the way to closing the gap with the PC by mid 2009. The iPhone has shown what a good browsing solution can do for the mobile internet."

MID product releases

Bearing the relevant arguments in mind, where does the industry stand today? Which MID manufacturers have chosen to go with each of the semiconductor manufacturers?

Intel announced its first-generation low-power platform (formerly codenamed Menlow) for mobile Internet devices in April this year. Since then, a few customers have launched devices based on this, and others are expected to do so through the rest of the 2008. Intel have disclosed a long list of signed-up system manufacturers, such as Aigo, Asus, BenQ, Clarion, Digifriends, Fujitsu, Gigabyte, Hanbit, KJS, Lenovo, Panasonic, Samsung, Sharp, Sophia Systems, Tabletkoisk, USI, WiBrain and Yuk Yung.

According to VIA, the most famous MID to use a VIA processor is the OQO e2 – although some people might refer to that as a UMPC rather than a MID. In its various configurations it runs Windows Vista Ultimate or Premium and Windows XP Professional and Tablet Edition. It's said to be a full PC in every way and includes Wi-Fi, 2G and 3G connectivity. Other MID devices are being developed around VIA's ultra mobile processor platforms, but have not yet been announced.

With ARM's somewhat broader definition of the term MID, the company claims the Nokia N810 (especially the WiMax edition that is at present only available in the US) and the Apple iPod Touch as two high volume MIDs using their processor cores. Morris went on to suggest that the Nokia Maemo operating system is the 'father' of Moblin (an Intel-supported project for developing open-source software for MIDs using Linux) because a large percentage of it is based on the same code.

With an eye to the future, we asked each company how MID processors will develop in the short term, what trends are likely to emerge and what, if any, relevant upcoming products have been announced. Intel cited an uncertainty of how the Internet will evolve as a justification for being somewhat vague about plans in this area beyond the next couple of years.

Nevertheless, Kedia committed to continue to deliver high performance and low power while maintaining full software and internet compatibility, whatever that might mean in practice. In the mid-term, though, a second platform, codenamed Moorestown and based on Intel Atom processors, is scheduled for release by 2010. The first Atom processors reduced peak power by a factor of 10 compared to the first UMPC platforms, and Moorestown is expected to reduce idle power by a similar amount.

VIA's Brown stressed low-level features, such as more advanced manufacturing processes, decreased package sizes, lower power consumption and even more features integrated onto smaller platforms. As an example he mentioned the 75mm by 45mm VIA mobile-ITX prototype demonstrated in June 2007, which also includes a mobile phone module. He thought it probable that such developments would result in x86- based MIDs with smartphone features during 2009.

ARM's Morris painted a picture of the future that centred on two areas – processors and graphics. In the realm of processors, Morris indicated that a number of ARM11 products (of which the Cortex-A8 is the first member) will enter the market within the next 12 months. He predicted net performance gains of four to five times the speed of currently available products, resulting from a doubling of the clock and processor efficiencies.

Morris' mention of graphics was somewhat surprising, since our questions had all related to processor technology. However, ARM's vision of the future sees a marriage of the processor and GPU. Indeed, ARM partners are already developing application processors for the MID market with high-performance 3D and video engines for improved response times and HD video. For more information on this, see the 'CPU Meets GPU' box.

Unlike the market for PC processors, which in recent years has been a two-horse race (albeit with one horse a tad lame), the processor wars that are looming in the MID arena show signs of having three healthy players. And with AMD and Nvidia entering the frame with the novel new approach of combing CPU and GPU on the one chip, the battlefield could become even more complicated. Will one architecture dominate? Or, as ARM's Morris suggests, is there room for a number of different approaches? Whatever the result, there are undoubtedly some interesting times ahead.