• cmhe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 months ago

    “you” as in person with required skills, resources and access to a chip fabrication facility. For many others they can just buy something designed and produced by others, or play around a bit on FPGAs.

    We will also see how much variation with RISC-V will actually happen, because if every processor is a unique piece of engineering, it is really hard to write software, that works on every one.

    Even with ARM there are arguable too many designs out there, which currently take a lot of effort to integrate.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      Sure, and there are more people with that access than just AMD, ARM, NVIDIA, and Intel.

      If game devs supported RISC-V, Valve could’ve made the Steam Deck without having to get AMD’s help, which means they would’ve had more options to keep prices down while meeting their performance goals. Likewise for server vendors, phone manufacturers, etc, who currently need to buy from ARM (and fab themselves) or AMD/Intel.

      And that’s why I mentioned 3D printing. Making custom 3D models of LEGO pieces is out of reach for many (most?) and even owning a 3D printer is out of reach for many. I have one, but I’ve only built a handful of things because it’s time consuming.

      As it gets more software support, we should see a lot more variety in RISC-V chips. We’re not there yet, but we should be excited because it’s starting to get traction, and the future looks bright.

      • cmhe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        It also means that anyone can make their own instruction set extensions or just some custom modifications, which would make software much more difficult to port. You would have to patch your compiler for every individual chip, if you even figure out what those instructions are, and what they do. Backwards, forwards or sideway (to other cpus from other vendors) compatibility takes effort, and not everyone will try to have that, and instead add their own individual secret sauce to their instruction set.

        IMO, I am excited about RISC-V, but if the license doesn’t force adopters to open their designs under an open source license as well, I do expect even more portability issues as we already have with ARM socs.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Compilers basically already do that, and distributed executables usually assume minimal instruction support. Compilers can detect what’s supported, so it’s largely a solved problem, at least if you compile things yourself.