Absolutely smoked by rpi5, often by rpi4. To make matters worse, a radically unsupported core with no mainline support. https://www.phoronix.com/review/orange-pi-rv2-benchmarks/2

▲

cbm-vic-20 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

I can accept the performance issues for now- it's an emerging platform, and hasn't had the huge amounts of resources poured into it like ARM. There's a chicken-and-egg problem here, since those resources will be limited since people aren't buying RISC-V equipment, which limits the incentive to commit resources, etc.

But what I cannot accept is the truly awful documentation and software support from the vendors. This is where Raspberry Pi shines, and is IMO one of the most significant factors in its success. I'm excited that RPi is dipping their toes into the RISC-V pool with the Hazard3 cores in the RP2350- perhaps they will be able to release a Raspberry Pi RISC-V edition board some day.

But I'm hesitant to buy one of the current RV SBCs, so I guess I'm part of the problem.

I'm also surprised that there aren't any startups producing small, simple CPUs and SOCs outside of China (as least, none that I'm aware of). Is there no investment available in India, N. America, Japan, Europe, Israel (* not bringing the current situation into this, just noting they have chip fabs)? Fabricating chips is not cheap, but the first ones don't need to be the top-of-the-line TSMC 3nm process.

	▲	dlcarrier 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Poor vendor software support is also expected, because it's too early into development of the RISC-V architecture for software to have universal support on different hardware variations. What that leaves is a need for good documentation, but Orange Pi does have that: http://www.orangepi.org/orangepiwiki/index.php/Orange_Pi_RV2 If you're not working on RISC-V-specific development, than it isn't a product for you, but with step-by-step guides for building uboot and the linux kernel, as well as running various LLMs on the TPU, it is very well supported for the current RISC-V audience.

▲

Havoc 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Don’t think people buy riscv for their performance competitiveness at this stage

▲

moffkalast 4 days ago | parent [-]

People don't really buy RISCV at all at this point, there's noting less compatible you could get if you tried.

	▲	Imustaskforhelp 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		isn't there box64 that can run x64 applications? And I think a language like golang can be a really really nice fit given how it can be compiled really fast towards risc-v as well Maybe java also runs in risc-v I am not sure, surely people are working on java support I suppose. People buy risc-v to support an open standard and to not worry about licensing fees. Isro (india's nasa basically) uses some risc-v chips to not license arm chips etc. because of either better national security (to have less arm influence) or because they don't want licensing fees given how rudiculously price efficient isro is.

▲

adgjlsfhk1 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

It wouldn't shock me if performance doubles over the next couple years. This chip is one of the first supports the RiscV Vector extension, so compilers have a lot of years of catch up to vectorize effectively.

	▲	camel-cdr 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		It already did between minor geekbench versions even though not all benchmarks are accelerated yet: https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/10993563?baseli...