It's hard to ascribe a whole lot of meaning to "designed for form factors beyond mobile" because mobile battery powered compiling is the most demanding case. I suppose it means they can scale compilers for ART across plugged-in, big battery, and small battery cases.
Dalvik, and Dalvik's JIT compiler are definitely tuned for small batteries.
Dalvik claims to be twice as fast interpreting DEX compared to Java bytecode interpretation.
The Dalvik JIT compiler focuses on critical sections of code. There's a reason you don't see Hotspot on battery powered devices.
Large amounts of the Android framework, especially the foundations of drawing and the View hierarchy, are in C or C++. Compiling an interactive app to native code makes much less difference in performance than a synthetic benchmark of DEX interpretation might lead one to think.
The Dalvik JIT compiler focuses on critical sections of code. There's a reason you don't see Hotspot on battery powered devices.
Hotspot get its name from the term of art for a critical section of code, though. That's not something that makes them different from each other; it's what they have in common.
What separates them must be that only one of them was designed with a power budget in mind.
Only in a very general sense. Dalvik's JIT really tries to minimize JIT compilation. Modern Java JIT compilers are oriented around the goal of extracting maximum performance from compiled code. That's priority #1, and there is no #2.
Dalvik, and Dalvik's JIT compiler are definitely tuned for small batteries.