8 ms·

I'm not sure why pedroaraujo is being downvoted other than in response to his criticism of HN topcommenter Chuck McManis. Pedro is correct; toy CPUs , like what

I'm not sure why pedroaraujo is being downvoted other than in response to his criticism of HN topcommenter Chuck McManis. Pedro is correct; toy CPUs , like what Chuck mentioned building, are so trivial that undergraduate students can build functioning models of them in a few days or hours. They are quite literally thousands of times less complex than the CPUs (even RISC arches) that are discussed in the article. I also concur with Pedro on the clock speed part - clock speed has absolutely nothing to do with your hardware design until you have written all the HDL, simulated its behavioral characteristics, actually synthesized the logic, completed the analog and I/O components of the design, and are actually preparing for tapeout. There's a reason only AMD and Intel make large CPUs for the consumer market, and it's not because college students are too busy. I'm going to fade into the grey background for this, but ChuckMcM's comment is yet another disappointing step toward the total calcification of this forum. It's not a commentary on the article; it simply states, lazily, and ignorantly, that whatever it is they're attempting at IIT-M, it can't be too hard. What an an incredibly condescending and blasé thing to say, especially on a public forum where what you say can't be erased. I'm actually quite glad to see another implementation of RISC-V from outside the US. The horde of nearly identical ARM cores on the market is terribly uninspiring.

PinguTS 9y ago
It seems both of you haven't read the article itself. The new CPU design is not about high-end CPU you expect from Intel or AMD. It is about CPUs for the IoT. We are talking about Cortex-M alike CPUs you find in micro-controllers from Infineon, NXP, Renesas, and alike. BTW there is competition to the ARM design. It is the micro-controllers from NXP former Freescale, which have their own CPU design heavily used in automotive.
- pedroaraujo 9y ago
  The comment applies to both high-end CPUs and to microcontrollers as well. Power and performance are even more critical on a microcontroller than on an high-end CPU.
  - dkersten 9y ago
    And yet you yourself said: > The CPUs you mentioned were simple micro-controllers, they were not designed for heavy processing tasks, they don't even have a branch predictor which is something fundamental to have some significant performance. So it seems his comparison was fair, after all? Given that the article is about microcontrollers too.
- pkhagah 9y ago
  IITM will start with tapeout of microcontroller class(C-class) CPU. But IITM is designing mobile, server and HPC class CPUs. http://rise.cse.iitm.ac.in/shakti.html http://rise.cse.iitm.ac.in/shakti.html
- gsmadhusudan 9y ago
  I am not sure where we have indicated that the focus is only on IoT class cores. The E and C class are aimed at that segment and this segment probably will account for the vast majority of cores shipped. So they are the first ones to be shipped. The I class for example, an early version which is on-line will be a full OO core - quad issue - dual threaded.Server, HPC and vector based cores are equally important for us. The core road-map is clearly outlined on the codeline.
- inteleng 9y ago
  Do you think ARMs don't have branch predictors or multi-level caching? Did you know some supercomputers are being designed around ARM computers? x86_64 is not king anymore.
kstenerud 9y ago
When you post a rude reply about a topic not many people have expertise in, the only thing up/downvoters have to go on is how you carry yourself. My first gut reaction to his reply was "troll."
- dummyfunnytoo 9y ago
  Funny, my reaction to the first comment was "douchebag"...
- inteleng 9y ago
  That's fair. I suppose I overestimated the significance of Chuck's username.
pertymcpert 9y ago
You have been exceptionally rude to a commentor that has not been rude at all but given some insight about the true difficulties of the making a viable CPU business.
- kjs3 9y ago
  Not to mention a commentor with an industry reputation in the field, whereas the replier has none.
raverbashing 9y ago
> clock speed has absolutely nothing to do with your hardware design until you have written all the HDL, simulated its behavioral characteristics, actually synthesized the logic, completed the analog and I/O components of the design, and are actually preparing for tapeout So you're going to do all of that without even thinking about your target clock rate? Unlikely But your comment I can respect, as you explained things politely > I'm actually quite glad to see another implementation of RISC-V from outside the US. The horde of nearly identical ARM cores on the market is terribly uninspiring. Totally agree
AnimalMuppet 9y ago
> I'm not sure why pedroaraujo is being downvoted other than in response to his criticism of HN topcommenter Chuck McManis. Because he phrased too much of his disagreement as personal attack. That's against the HN rules. And because he took the example of chips from two generations ago (which is about how far back you have to go to find non-mainstream but reasonable chips) and says that they "were simple microcontrollers". IIRC, the NS32032 was close to equivalent to the Intel offerings of the time. Didn't even have a branch predictor? Nobody else did in those days, either. pedroaraujo's points get lost in the vitriol and in trying to apply today's expectations to examples from 20 years ago. Most of the discussion seems to be centering on his points, which is good. But the tone of the post is certainly downvote-worthy.
ChuckMcM 9y ago
"ChuckMcM's comment is yet another disappointing step toward the total calcification of this forum. It's not a commentary on the article; it simply states, lazily, and ignorantly, that whatever it is they're attempting at IIT-M, it can't be too hard. What an an incredibly condescending and blasé thing to say, especially on a public forum where what you say can't be erased." I suppose it could be deleted though. I would hate to be a contributor to calcification. One of the things that stuck out to me about the article was that everyone of their stated goals would be met "instantly" if they bought an ARM architecture license. They aren't cheap but in terms of man years of effort they aren't expensive either. As a result of owning such a license they could make processors of their own design which leveraged they ARM infrastructure (this is what Apple does for example). That could meet their 'openness' of implementation goals, their 'made in india' goals, and their 'range of architectures from controller to server'. But they aren't doing that. I understand you read it as condescending, but my intention was to be illustrative of the part of the problems they missed in that grand vision they wrote about in the article. How would you suggest I say that such that you would not hear it as a dismissal?
- inteleng 9y ago
  It wouldn't really fit with the PR narrative for them to just license IP from ARM, and they probably wouldn't develop nearly as much technical knowledge as they would developing the architecture themselves. Aside, I hope my comment didn't seem too abrasive. It's hard not to get attached to something you work closely on most of your life.
  - ChuckMcM 9y ago
    I expect you are exactly correct on the narrative angle. Which is sad because there are so many great stories of people who worked on someone else's technology and then branched out and started their own. The Fairchild => Intel story is just one such example. And it makes me sad when the 'narrative' interferes with the goal. If the goal is to develop a vibrant CPU/semiconductor capability in India then that effort is cultivated by minimizing risk where possible and leveraging other work. And leveraging ARM would be a great way to train up on all the things you have to have/do in order to support a range of offerings for a given ISA. As for abrasiveness, I read it as a passion more than insult. I also read it as a signal of frustration and I like to understand the roots of the frustration in order to improve things.

PinguTS 9y ago

It seems both of you haven't read the article itself. The new CPU design is not about high-end CPU you expect from Intel or AMD. It is about CPUs for the IoT. We are talking about Cortex-M alike CPUs you find in micro-controllers from Infineon, NXP, Renesas, and alike. BTW there is competition to the ARM design. It is the micro-controllers from NXP former Freescale, which have their own CPU design heavily used in automotive.

pedroaraujo 9y ago
The comment applies to both high-end CPUs and to microcontrollers as well. Power and performance are even more critical on a microcontroller than on an high-end CPU.
- dkersten 9y ago
  And yet you yourself said: > The CPUs you mentioned were simple micro-controllers, they were not designed for heavy processing tasks, they don't even have a branch predictor which is something fundamental to have some significant performance. So it seems his comparison was fair, after all? Given that the article is about microcontrollers too.
pkhagah 9y ago
IITM will start with tapeout of microcontroller class(C-class) CPU. But IITM is designing mobile, server and HPC class CPUs. http://rise.cse.iitm.ac.in/shakti.html http://rise.cse.iitm.ac.in/shakti.html
gsmadhusudan 9y ago
I am not sure where we have indicated that the focus is only on IoT class cores. The E and C class are aimed at that segment and this segment probably will account for the vast majority of cores shipped. So they are the first ones to be shipped. The I class for example, an early version which is on-line will be a full OO core - quad issue - dual threaded.Server, HPC and vector based cores are equally important for us. The core road-map is clearly outlined on the codeline.
inteleng 9y ago
Do you think ARMs don't have branch predictors or multi-level caching? Did you know some supercomputers are being designed around ARM computers? x86_64 is not king anymore.

kstenerud 9y ago

When you post a rude reply about a topic not many people have expertise in, the only thing up/downvoters have to go on is how you carry yourself. My first gut reaction to his reply was "troll."

dummyfunnytoo 9y ago
Funny, my reaction to the first comment was "douchebag"...
inteleng 9y ago
That's fair. I suppose I overestimated the significance of Chuck's username.

pertymcpert 9y ago

You have been exceptionally rude to a commentor that has not been rude at all but given some insight about the true difficulties of the making a viable CPU business.

kjs3 9y ago
Not to mention a commentor with an industry reputation in the field, whereas the replier has none.

raverbashing 9y ago

> clock speed has absolutely nothing to do with your hardware design until you have written all the HDL, simulated its behavioral characteristics, actually synthesized the logic, completed the analog and I/O components of the design, and are actually preparing for tapeout So you're going to do all of that without even thinking about your target clock rate? Unlikely But your comment I can respect, as you explained things politely > I'm actually quite glad to see another implementation of RISC-V from outside the US. The horde of nearly identical ARM cores on the market is terribly uninspiring. Totally agree

AnimalMuppet 9y ago

> I'm not sure why pedroaraujo is being downvoted other than in response to his criticism of HN topcommenter Chuck McManis. Because he phrased too much of his disagreement as personal attack. That's against the HN rules. And because he took the example of chips from two generations ago (which is about how far back you have to go to find non-mainstream but reasonable chips) and says that they "were simple microcontrollers". IIRC, the NS32032 was close to equivalent to the Intel offerings of the time. Didn't even have a branch predictor? Nobody else did in those days, either. pedroaraujo's points get lost in the vitriol and in trying to apply today's expectations to examples from 20 years ago. Most of the discussion seems to be centering on his points, which is good. But the tone of the post is certainly downvote-worthy.

ChuckMcM 9y ago

"ChuckMcM's comment is yet another disappointing step toward the total calcification of this forum. It's not a commentary on the article; it simply states, lazily, and ignorantly, that whatever it is they're attempting at IIT-M, it can't be too hard. What an an incredibly condescending and blasé thing to say, especially on a public forum where what you say can't be erased." I suppose it could be deleted though. I would hate to be a contributor to calcification. One of the things that stuck out to me about the article was that everyone of their stated goals would be met "instantly" if they bought an ARM architecture license. They aren't cheap but in terms of man years of effort they aren't expensive either. As a result of owning such a license they could make processors of their own design which leveraged they ARM infrastructure (this is what Apple does for example). That could meet their 'openness' of implementation goals, their 'made in india' goals, and their 'range of architectures from controller to server'. But they aren't doing that. I understand you read it as condescending, but my intention was to be illustrative of the part of the problems they missed in that grand vision they wrote about in the article. How would you suggest I say that such that you would not hear it as a dismissal?

inteleng 9y ago
It wouldn't really fit with the PR narrative for them to just license IP from ARM, and they probably wouldn't develop nearly as much technical knowledge as they would developing the architecture themselves. Aside, I hope my comment didn't seem too abrasive. It's hard not to get attached to something you work closely on most of your life.
- ChuckMcM 9y ago
  I expect you are exactly correct on the narrative angle. Which is sad because there are so many great stories of people who worked on someone else's technology and then branched out and started their own. The Fairchild => Intel story is just one such example. And it makes me sad when the 'narrative' interferes with the goal. If the goal is to develop a vibrant CPU/semiconductor capability in India then that effort is cultivated by minimizing risk where possible and leveraging other work. And leveraging ARM would be a great way to train up on all the things you have to have/do in order to support a range of offerings for a given ISA. As for abrasiveness, I read it as a passion more than insult. I also read it as a signal of frustration and I like to understand the roots of the frustration in order to improve things.