It should be RISC-V... who is in charge at Intel??

Is this related to the rumors of softbank (ARM) money injection in Intel?

magicalhippo 6 days ago | parent | next [-]

From the article:

Why is Intel manufacturing an Arm SoC as a reference platform? Probably because it's trying to attract external customers, and there's a whole lot more companies building Arm SoCs than there are firms pitching x86-64 processors.

They're not trying to build the next best thing. They're trying to attract customers.

▲

rbanffy 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don't think Intel plans to make a product, but to prove they can build a working chip that's not one of their own design. Being ARM has fewer developmental risks than a RISC-V design and make validation easier.

▲

FirmwareBurner 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>It should be RISC-V... who is in charge at Intel??

Why should it be that? What are your arguments?

▲

sylware 5 days ago | parent [-]

oh, you are new to HN, because you would not need to ask such question if you were reading HN in the last few years...

You can start on risc-v wikipedia page and/or on the official risc-v web site.

▲

nullpoint420 4 days ago | parent [-]

I would say they’re smart to invest in ARM over RISC-V for the time being. It was hard enough to get the industry to support x86 and ARM64. I mean the Windows transition is still not fully complete, and they’ve been trying since Windows 8.

	▲	sylware 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		I would say otherwise. The future, if sane, is certainly not with a PI locked ISA like ARM all over again (look at x86). Actually, it looks like a super bad move from intel.

▲

mepian 6 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Intel demonstrated a RISC-V chip called Horse Creek two years ago.

	▲	sylware 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		If they manage to plug their microarch design on RISC-V ISA (yes, they will throw away a ton of things), they will be ready, performance-wise. This real hard part is transitioning the software stack, including games...