3 ms·
Hopefully this is a crack in the armor of the x86 monopoly - after all what is an instruction set but an "API for processors"? The novelty is in how you implem
by paulmd 6y ago
Hopefully this is a crack in the armor of the x86 monopoly - after all what is an instruction set but an "API for processors"? The novelty is in how you implement the instruction set, not the actual API that says "this instruction takes A and adds it to B", that is purely a matter of compatibility.
- xxpor 6y agoWho would willingly make a new x86 design these days? I would think this would crack ARM's control over their instruction set though. I can't imagine it'd be worth re-implementing literally the entire thing from scratch though when ARM will willingly sell you IP blocks, as opposed to Intel or ARM which will certainly not.
- paulmd 6y agoZhaoxin Semiconductor, for one. Hygon licensed AMD's architecture as a starting point for their own stuff for another. You're not going to find a lot in the west due to the patent issues (why follow that path when you're doomed to be sued into the ground), but there clearly is a desire to pursue x86 as an ISA (as opposed to going with ARM).
- xxpor 6y agoThat's fair, but on the other hand, why would they have cared about American copyright in the first place? Worst that could happen to them is they're banned from being imported into the west, which they probably didn't see as a realistic market anyway.
- garaetjjte 6y agoDoes anybody claim copyright for ISA though? I think it is just patent minefield.