▲ | zachbee 9 days ago | |||||||||||||
Author here -- I don't disagree! I actually noted this in the article: > Well, it turns out that LLMs are also pretty valuable when it comes to chips for lucrative markets -- but they won’t be doing most of the design work. LLM copilots for Verilog are, at best, mediocre. But leveraging an LLM to write small snippets of simple code can still save engineers time, and ultimately save their employers money. I think designers getting 2x faster is probably optimistic, but I also could be wrong about that! Most of my chip design experience has been at smaller companies, with good documentation, where I've been focused on datapath architecture & design, so maybe I'm underestimating how much boilerplate the average engineer deals with. Regardless, I don't think LLMs will be designing high-performance datapath or networking Verilog anytime soon. | ||||||||||||||
▲ | mgraczyk 9 days ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||
Thanks for the reply! At large companies with many designers, a lot of time is spent coordinating and planning. LLMs can already help with that. As far as design/copilot goes, I think there are reasons to be much more optimistic. Existing models haven't seen much Verilog. With better training data it's reasonable to expect that they will improve to perform at least as well on Verilog as they do on python. But even if there is a 10% chance it's reasonable for VCs to invest in these companies. | ||||||||||||||
|