6 ms·

Absolutely not. We need more competition because the #1 reason we got to this situation is mono culture and a single platform (x86). We need Apple to succeed of

Absolutely not. We need more competition because the #1 reason we got to this situation is mono culture and a single platform (x86). We need Apple to succeed of creating an alternative ARM based desktop/laptop platform and for more competition we could add in Mips64 from China to the mix. I am really hoping that by 2025 we are going to have 3 major platforms available for end customers, so that there is real competition.

Hamuko 6y ago
Isn't having a whole bunch of different processor architectures at the same time kind of bad for end-users?
- spijdar 6y ago
  This really depends. Once-upon-a-time, at least in the UNIX (tm) world, there were a plethora of ISAs, and this was the environment where ideas like Java really made sense. Write once, run anywhere. Most OSes are still pretty well situated to handle this. Java remains, and is easily cross platform. I can run Java-based proprietary games like Minecraft on my POWER9 desktop, despite no-one involved probably ever considering ppc64le a valid target. The CLR on Windows is also pretty easily cross-platform, although it won't help legacy x86 PE executables. Apple has solved this for ages on the tooling side, encouraging production of "fat" binaries with many arches since OS X was NeXT, and your .app packages needed to run on x86 + m68k + SPARC + PA-RISC. Emulators like Rosetta (and qemu's usermode emulation) can fill the gap of legacy executables, while these other technologies can make the end-user experience good. Of course, that's only if a) someone writes your platform's equivalent of Rosetta, and b) developers write crossplatform apps. So, the answer depends on how cynical or optimistic you are :-)
- pabs3 6y ago
  The experience in Linux distros is that extra arches surface bugs that other arches paper over, leading to higher quality software. For example unaligned memory access is slower on some arches but causes crashes on other ones.
JAlexoid 6y ago
And where are those chips going to be made? The issue with Intel's dominance is it's complete dominance on the supply side as well. You fail to realize that this isn't like 3D printing, or other low volume manufacturing. You can't just setup a 100nm Si lithography lab in your spare room and churn out RISC-V chips. In 5 years - realistically we will have a few high performance(non-mobile) ARM chips manufactured at economic scale. Any other type of disruption would require Intel and AMD to fail and relinquish the supply side capacity... or China investing billions into new chipmaking facilities now.(it takes a few years to build that capacity)
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  China already has 14nm online, and should have 7nm in a year or two, so that means that we will probably see some real RISC-V chips from there soon, if sanctions continue. So I think that we will have a four way competition between Intel, AMD, Apple, and Chinese RISC-V chips. That being said, I don't see x86 dying, I think AMD and eventually Intel when they wake up will be competitive.
  - StreamBright 6y ago
    I don't see X86 dying either, I think it will be dominant in the desktop/laptop segment for a long time. I am not sure why Longsoon uses Mips64 over RISC-V. Is RISC-V generally available and ready for prime times?
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      I think Longsoon still uses MIPS64 because of institutional knowledge. It's moreso Alibaba and HiSilicon that I think are promising, and they both seem to be getting on the RISC-V train.
  - totalZero 6y ago
    When you say they "should have 7nm in a year or two," are you just banking on them copying or stealing a European-made EUV machine? China cannot be competitive at the razor's edge if its semiconductor companies depend on promptly copying/stealing technology that European, Taiwanese, and American companies bring to market.
totalZero 6y ago
How much innovation actually comes from China, versus just being stolen by China? The lithography companies actually have to talk about the measures they take to stop China from stealing their IP on their earnings calls. China is a manufacturing hub, but its (often government backed) chip companies run low-margin businesses that don't make enough money to invest heavily in R&D. Go look at Apple or Qualcomm's gross margins and compare them to Huawei or Xiaomi.

Hamuko 6y ago

Isn't having a whole bunch of different processor architectures at the same time kind of bad for end-users?

spijdar 6y ago
This really depends. Once-upon-a-time, at least in the UNIX (tm) world, there were a plethora of ISAs, and this was the environment where ideas like Java really made sense. Write once, run anywhere. Most OSes are still pretty well situated to handle this. Java remains, and is easily cross platform. I can run Java-based proprietary games like Minecraft on my POWER9 desktop, despite no-one involved probably ever considering ppc64le a valid target. The CLR on Windows is also pretty easily cross-platform, although it won't help legacy x86 PE executables. Apple has solved this for ages on the tooling side, encouraging production of "fat" binaries with many arches since OS X was NeXT, and your .app packages needed to run on x86 + m68k + SPARC + PA-RISC. Emulators like Rosetta (and qemu's usermode emulation) can fill the gap of legacy executables, while these other technologies can make the end-user experience good. Of course, that's only if a) someone writes your platform's equivalent of Rosetta, and b) developers write crossplatform apps. So, the answer depends on how cynical or optimistic you are :-)
pabs3 6y ago
The experience in Linux distros is that extra arches surface bugs that other arches paper over, leading to higher quality software. For example unaligned memory access is slower on some arches but causes crashes on other ones.

JAlexoid 6y ago

And where are those chips going to be made? The issue with Intel's dominance is it's complete dominance on the supply side as well. You fail to realize that this isn't like 3D printing, or other low volume manufacturing. You can't just setup a 100nm Si lithography lab in your spare room and churn out RISC-V chips. In 5 years - realistically we will have a few high performance(non-mobile) ARM chips manufactured at economic scale. Any other type of disruption would require Intel and AMD to fail and relinquish the supply side capacity... or China investing billions into new chipmaking facilities now.(it takes a few years to build that capacity)

sudosysgen 6y ago
China already has 14nm online, and should have 7nm in a year or two, so that means that we will probably see some real RISC-V chips from there soon, if sanctions continue. So I think that we will have a four way competition between Intel, AMD, Apple, and Chinese RISC-V chips. That being said, I don't see x86 dying, I think AMD and eventually Intel when they wake up will be competitive.
- StreamBright 6y ago
  I don't see X86 dying either, I think it will be dominant in the desktop/laptop segment for a long time. I am not sure why Longsoon uses Mips64 over RISC-V. Is RISC-V generally available and ready for prime times?
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    I think Longsoon still uses MIPS64 because of institutional knowledge. It's moreso Alibaba and HiSilicon that I think are promising, and they both seem to be getting on the RISC-V train.
- totalZero 6y ago
  When you say they "should have 7nm in a year or two," are you just banking on them copying or stealing a European-made EUV machine? China cannot be competitive at the razor's edge if its semiconductor companies depend on promptly copying/stealing technology that European, Taiwanese, and American companies bring to market.

totalZero 6y ago

How much innovation actually comes from China, versus just being stolen by China? The lithography companies actually have to talk about the measures they take to stop China from stealing their IP on their earnings calls. China is a manufacturing hub, but its (often government backed) chip companies run low-margin businesses that don't make enough money to invest heavily in R&D. Go look at Apple or Qualcomm's gross margins and compare them to Huawei or Xiaomi.