3 ms·

Maybe this is naive, but the way I see it is: more architectures = more room for innovation. Ultimately RISC-V will allow for more competition in the CPU space,

Maybe this is naive, but the way I see it is: more architectures = more room for innovation. Ultimately RISC-V will allow for more competition in the CPU space, driving down prices for consumers.

giantrobot 4y ago
Releasing some new competitive CPU is a billion+ dollar hurdle. No one is going to release a RISC-V competitor to any current top of the line CPUs without that minimum investment. Who is going to do that level in investment when buying licensed ARM cores is orders of magnitude cheaper?
- snvzz 4y ago
  >Releasing some new competitive CPU is a billion+ dollar hurdle. We are well past that hurdle. Competitive CPU designs have already been announced, and known funding for RISC-V is already in excess of 10 billion.
- hristov 4y ago
  I should note here that Apple designed and released their CPUs for mobile phones, tablets and PCs without buying ARM cores. They are still using and paying for the ARM ISA, but they designed their own cores. And their CPUs are widely held as better than the ones that use Arm cores. (E.g. the Samsung ones). So there is potential for investment.
  - giantrobot 4y ago
    Apple easily spent a billion dollars developing their A-series chips from the purchase of P.A. Semi in 2008 through the release of the iPhone 4 with the A4 chip in 2010. A lot more money went into subsequent designs and now the M-series. There's potential for investment but that investment is a lot of money.
- scheme271 4y ago
  OEMS make not want to spend that money but companies like amazon, apple, qualcomm, google, fujitsu, already spend that money to get custom arm cores. Doing a risc-v core instead means you potentially save on licensing although that might not offset being able to get a arm design and modify it. It probably comes down to licensing terms and pricing that we're not privy to.
- pantalaimon 4y ago
  > Who is going to do that level in investment when buying licensed ARM cores is orders of magnitude cheaper? Companies like Huawei who might not be able to license new ARM designs
JAlexoid 4y ago
At a certain point you have no more benefits from end user variety. Think about it this way - what benefits would you get if each house had a different standard of electricity delivery? Let's say you have DC 300V, your neighbor AC 220V 50hz... meanwhile the building across the street was all three phase AC 150V 100hz. You wouldn't be able to buy a random TV and be sure that it works. In the end either ARM or RISC-V will displace Intel x86. And you'll have much more progress, just like the progress in ARM space was much more rapid than x86 space.

Maybe this is naive, but the way I see it is: more architectures = more room for innovation. Ultimately RISC-V will allow for more competition in the CPU space, driving down prices for consumers.

giantrobot 4y ago

Releasing some new competitive CPU is a billion+ dollar hurdle. No one is going to release a RISC-V competitor to any current top of the line CPUs without that minimum investment. Who is going to do that level in investment when buying licensed ARM cores is orders of magnitude cheaper?

snvzz 4y ago
>Releasing some new competitive CPU is a billion+ dollar hurdle. We are well past that hurdle. Competitive CPU designs have already been announced, and known funding for RISC-V is already in excess of 10 billion.
hristov 4y ago
I should note here that Apple designed and released their CPUs for mobile phones, tablets and PCs without buying ARM cores. They are still using and paying for the ARM ISA, but they designed their own cores. And their CPUs are widely held as better than the ones that use Arm cores. (E.g. the Samsung ones). So there is potential for investment.
- giantrobot 4y ago
  Apple easily spent a billion dollars developing their A-series chips from the purchase of P.A. Semi in 2008 through the release of the iPhone 4 with the A4 chip in 2010. A lot more money went into subsequent designs and now the M-series. There's potential for investment but that investment is a lot of money.
scheme271 4y ago
OEMS make not want to spend that money but companies like amazon, apple, qualcomm, google, fujitsu, already spend that money to get custom arm cores. Doing a risc-v core instead means you potentially save on licensing although that might not offset being able to get a arm design and modify it. It probably comes down to licensing terms and pricing that we're not privy to.
pantalaimon 4y ago
> Who is going to do that level in investment when buying licensed ARM cores is orders of magnitude cheaper? Companies like Huawei who might not be able to license new ARM designs

JAlexoid 4y ago

At a certain point you have no more benefits from end user variety. Think about it this way - what benefits would you get if each house had a different standard of electricity delivery? Let's say you have DC 300V, your neighbor AC 220V 50hz... meanwhile the building across the street was all three phase AC 150V 100hz. You wouldn't be able to buy a random TV and be sure that it works. In the end either ARM or RISC-V will displace Intel x86. And you'll have much more progress, just like the progress in ARM space was much more rapid than x86 space.