|
| ▲ | crote 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| The good ARM designs aren't free either. The big difference is that you'll always be stuck paying Arm (either for whole ARM cores, or a licensing fee for your own design), whereas with RISC-V there can be genuine competition between companies offering performant RISC-V IP. In the MCU market the compute core is already an off-the-shelf drop-in component. Just look at the RP2350: in addition to its traditional ARM cores they also last-minute dropped in two RISC-V cores because it was so trivial to do - and you can select which set is active via a boot-time firmware flag. I very much doubt we'll see that kind of flexibility with high-end client compute, but with the switch to separate compute chiplets we're not far off already! |
|
| ▲ | rwmj 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| is what every company that didn't understand disruption said. |
| |
| ▲ | hughw 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | iirc Christenson's chief example was IBM not deigning to cannibalize their high-end disk drive business by competing on the new, less capable low-end devices. |
|
|
| ▲ | cold_pizz4 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Wait a few years until a RISC-V Fab as a Service emerges and any teenager with an LLM can design and order their own chips ;) |
| |
