1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Arm 'opens' core IP to academia

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by bit-tech, 16 Sep 2019.

  1. bit-tech

    bit-tech Supreme Overlord Staff Administrator

    Joined:
    12 Mar 2001
    Posts:
    2,516
    Likes Received:
    44
    Read more
     
  2. jb0

    jb0 Active Member

    Joined:
    8 Apr 2012
    Posts:
    503
    Likes Received:
    72
    Is it just me, or does ARM not have the slightest clue why anyone is interested in RISC-V?
    Because they seem to be flailing about trying to address the problem with "no money down" promotions, while simultaneously placing terms in these free licenses that seem actively calculated to drive people away from ARM.
     
  3. Gareth Halfacree

    Gareth Halfacree WIIGII! Staff Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    4 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    12,846
    Likes Received:
    2,046
    It's panicking. All it has is its IP, so it can't really give it away like RISC-V, while it's seeing a decent-size portion of its customer base flirting with or outright moving to FOSSi alternatives. Heck, just this month GigaDevice - fair-sized Chinese chipmaker - launched a pin-compatible drop-in replacement 32-bit microcontroller which is exactly like its previous model except RISC-V instead of Arm architecture. Swap the chips out, recompile for RV32, job done. Is there any wonder Arm's getting antsy?
     
  4. edzieba

    edzieba Virtual Realist

    Joined:
    14 Jan 2009
    Posts:
    3,361
    Likes Received:
    325
    And that's the rub. RISC-V can eat ARM's long-tail, but when it comes to cases where you have a legacy codebase and performance requirements beyond "it runs", ARM has a similar inertial to x86. It's not so much a choice of 'RISC-V is free, and ARM is $x00,000, so RISC-V!', but 'ARM is $x00,000 to continue with our current codebase & engineering experience and with fab-houses whose bread and butter is ARM, RISC-V is $y00,000 to completely rearchitect all our code, replace out devtools and retrain engineers (to a new architecture without a mature talent pool), and hope no snags are hit when it comes to etching wafers'. Even if the long-term cost of multiple 'x'es is more than 'y', if your company needs to survive then y being greater than x may prohibit a switch in the short term if all the budget you have is 'x'.
    Whether ARM can survive as a 'squeezed middle' between commodity uC going to RISC-V and low-power-high-performance being edged ever closer on by x86 is another matter. ARM's efforts to break into high-performance have repeatedly flopped hard (the closest being Apple's ARM-derived cores, but the gap is further than benchmarks may lead you to expect), and their efforts to create the "yeah they're not so fast, but there's a lot of them!" server market is still chugging after a decade and multiple failed companies, and soon to be eaten by AMD's "there are a lot of them and they aren't crap!" chips. Smartphone, tablet, and smart-devices are the remaining middle ground, and while that market continues to expand there aren't all that many players in it to sell IP to.
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page