> I can't see any reason why the exact Wouldn't they need to implement a bunch of additional extensions which RISC-V doesen't currently have just to reach feat

> I can't see any reason why the exact Wouldn't they need to implement a bunch of additional extensions which RISC-V doesen't currently have just to reach feature parity? That alone would've introduced significant delays. Also it took Apple 8 or so years to build a competitive desktop/laptop CPU. They released their first custom ARM core in 2012 and likely relied a lot on what they learned while working with Cortex so it's not like they started completely from scratch. And we're talking about Apple, very few if any other companies are willing to invest as much time and resources into a product targeting a stagnant or even shrinking market (desktops/laptops) with very low margins. I don't think Qualcomm can't design something that would be competitive with M1/2 they probably don't just see a lot of sense in that financially. How would RISC-V change this? Of course there are political reasons for Chinese companies (being increasingly cutoff from western tech to invest into RISC-V) which might be more important than financial ones. So a shift to RISC-V would be almost guaranteed to increase our reliance on China which in no way could be viewed as something positive... > I can see absolutely no reason to replace it any time soon. And presumably you would be fine to replace it when as machine which is just as fast in 5 years just because it used a RISC-V CPU despite there being significantly faster ARM/x86 devices on the market?