5 ms·
AFAIK, most advanced RISC-V design includes superscalar and OoOE (e.g. comparable to a MIPS R10000 (1995) or an Intel Pentium Pro (1995)), while the RISC-V for
by faragon 9y ago
AFAIK, most advanced RISC-V design includes superscalar and OoOE (e.g. comparable to a MIPS R10000 (1995) or an Intel Pentium Pro (1995)), while the RISC-V for the IoT is comparable to a typical single instructions per clock RISC CPU, e.g. MIPS R3000 (1988).
The success in the IoT will depend not only in a cheaper price because of no royalties, but also in the "ecosystem": peripherals, buses, etc. Running Linux is a huge start, so I have no doubt it can be a success in this field.
Regarding the use in mobile and desktop, it will have to wait until SIMD extensions are introduced, and software being adapted (e.g. ffmpeg/libav including RISC-V assembly SIMD implementation for the codecs).
Anyway, realistically, for the RISC-V getting enough traction, some big player should bet on that, which is currently highly improbable, unless some Apple/Samsung/Huawei/Google gets crazy enough for doing it.
- homero 9y agoNvidia would be perfect
- pjmlp 9y agoNVidia is busy with their own ARM designs.
- rjsw 9y agoNVidia are using RISC-V in their GPU designs.
- pjmlp 9y agoWhere can I read more about it?
- sherincall 9y ago- https://riscv.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Tue1100_Nvidia_RISCV_Story_V2.pdf https://riscv.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Tue1100_Nvidia_... - https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NVIDIA-RISC-V-Next-Gen-Falcon https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NVIDIA-R...
- Nokinside 9y ago>Regarding the use in mobile and desktop, it will have to wait until SIMD extensions are introduced I'm little confused about this talk and comments in here relating to open source in high performance applications (desktop, servers etc). The RISC-V ISA is open source, I get that. There can also be open source Verilog/VHDL designs available. They are probably good for small low performance IoT applications and old processes. But there is long way from ISA to silicon in high performance VLSI processor design for a new processes and foundries. Architecture, logic synthesis, timing analysis, floor planning, routing and placement, and ungodly amount of testing .. I don't see anyone spending hundreds of millions of chip design for RISC-V ISA and open sourcing it. In other words, if you want competitive RISC-V chip, some company must spend hundreds of millions to develop their own RISK-V chip architecture and they will not open source it.
- peatmoss 9y ago> In other words, if you want competitive RISC-V chip, some company must spend hundreds of millions to develop their own RISK-V chip architecture... I wonder if a country like Russia, wanting something that they can deploy without worrying that the NSA & Intel are cooperating on state spying, will eventually try and take something like this and bootstrap a domestic semiconductor line of business.
- Nokinside 9y agoRussians have build their own processors for decades. They have used SPARC instructions sets and they also have their own VLIW Elbrus 64-bit ISA and processors are made by TSMC for 28 nm process. It has Intel x86 comparability with system-level dynamic translation. Just adopting new Instruction Set Architecture (ISA) is not going to help to magically boost semiconductor business.
- srett 9y agoThe Russians have Baikal (T1), the Chinese have Loongson (3A/B). Both are MIPS based. Unfortunately, even though both announced that there will be consumer hardware available over a year ago, it did not happen. So I'm not too optimistic regarding RISC-V.