|
|
|
|
|
|
by speed_spread
709 days ago
|
|
|
There's no _particular_ reason to adopt RISC-V either, they'll just compete on price because there's no license to pay. So the Linux comparison applies in that even when RISC-V reaches performance parity with ARM/x64, the installed base of the incumbents will be enough to prevent mass migration. |
|
|
1. There's no big ecosystem of compiled ARM code to prevent people moving to RISC-V. In the embedded world everything is always compiled from source so it doesn't matter. On Android everything except games is bytecode. Maybe on Windows/Mac... but that's probably the last place we'll see RISC-V.
2. ARM and RISC-V are much more similar than ARM and x86 so it is way easier to translate ARM to RISC-V. It's also much more extensible so you can easily add instructions that you need to make the translation easy. I believe ARM has some instructions that are specifically included to make running x86 code easier - that sort of thing would be even easier on RISC-V.
You're probably right about price being the major differentiator, but I wouldn't underestimate that! Especially with ARM turning the screws on license fees.