3 ms·
Dunno, I'm still saving up for the billion-dollar fab I'll need before I can think about licensing an instruction set. As an aside, Espressif (or Xtensa if you
by pseudohadamard 2mo ago
Dunno, I'm still saving up for the billion-dollar fab I'll need before I can think about licensing an instruction set.
As an aside, Espressif (or Xtensa if you want to split hairs) have been quietly doing a lot of what RISC-V is supposed to do for years now. I know they've also been fiddling with RV32's but all the real work is LX6/LX7. They're best-known for their use in ESP32s but they also crop up in an awful lot of industrial/commercial gear.
- just6979 2mo agoAll the newest ESP32 variants for a bit now have been RISC-V. The last new LX7 was the ESP32-S3 (in fact, the S2 is the only other LX7), and LX6 is basically a legacy product that only lives on in the [non-variant] ESP32. The P4, the entire C and H series, and the new S31, are all RISC-V cores. Not to mention that RISC-V has even taken over for Espressif's classic ULP cores in all the same places (and even lives alongside it in the two LX7-based chips). They're well beyond "fiddling" with it.
- jurgenburgen 2mo agoMy point is that if an ARM chip costs 1$ then how much is licensing? 0.1$? 0.5$? That’s money that doesn’t need to go to ARM if everyone is using unlicensed instruction sets.