4 ms·
I'd argue that RISC-V is only really competing with ARM when it's possible to license a complete, competitive RISC-V core implementation and integrate it into a
by fancyfredbot 4y ago
I'd argue that RISC-V is only really competing with ARM when it's possible to license a complete, competitive RISC-V core implementation and integrate it into a product.
At the low end, I expect (and already see) that people can give away open source IP. But not sure this model works as well at the high end where things get a lot more difficult? While it's easy to imagine people creating high performance RISC-V cores, I think they would have to either sell processors or license the IP. That would be competition with ARM, and would be a good thing, but I don't think it is clear/obvious that using the RISC-V ISA would give any company doing that much of an advantage over ARM?
- Sirened 4y agoThis is something I'm excitedly watching as well. It's one thing to put out a free rv32i microcontroller and quite another to put out not just one but a regular stream of cores that keep raising the performance bar. The classic CPU industry is still squeezing out 10%+ performance gains per generation every year or two. Unless these large organizations start collaborating to make these chips faster (...doubtful unfortunately), I suspect they'll fall behind and stay behind.
- dkjaudyeqooe 4y agoAn obvious advantage is if you want to change the design of your cores you don't have to ask permission amd no-one can stop you. See ARM vs Qualcomm.