[Vt71fcAqt7]

I don't see why "moronic" was needed there. Also Risc-V has profiles that group multiple extensions together for specific use cases. For example RVA23[0] which requires 64 bit and vector extension among many others. Operating systems like android can (and most likely will) specify that they only support certain profiles.[1] Lastly, ARM is also fragmented between Armv8 and Armv7 which android developers are still supporting.

>RISC-V not only isn’t that on a technical level but is fighting some serious fragmentation.

Do you have any evidence to support this? Seems like RVA23 will be the first majorly supported extension. All the "high performance CPUs" right now are just dev kits, so I don't see how there can be fragmentation in a market that does not yet even exist.

[0] https://github.com/riscv/riscv-profiles/blob/main/src/rva23-...

[1] https://opensource.googleblog.com/2023/10/android-and-risc-v... (note: the blog mentions RVA22 but this has most likely been switched to RVA23 before full Risc-V support lands in Android).

[snvzz]

>All the "high performance CPUs" right now are just dev kits, so I don't see how there can be fragmentation in a market that does not yet even exist.

It comes straight from the "RISC-V know the facts" FUD campaign ARM infamously ran.

Yet, not even these dev kits suffer from "fragmentation". Basically:

- Previous wave implements RVA20, some of them with custom extensions, such as a harmless pre-ratification V extension.

- The open software ecosystem is built for RVA20, which the hardware supports. Vendors run their experiments within custom extension space, no harm is done.

- Current wave implements RVA22 with the ratified V extension, some of them with harmless custom extensions. As newer RVA profiles build on older RVA profiles, these chips run RVA20 code no worse than the previous wave.