Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Computer architects leaving Intel...
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 19:49 +0100 (BST)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <memo.20240828194931.19028s@jgd.cix.co.uk>
References: <w%JzO.33560$95o8.18523@fx09.iad>
Reply-To: jgd@cix.co.uk
Injection-Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 20:49:31 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="49d57e041fd6c3fe611ce201ea4c043c";
	logging-data="3770747"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Id4Nlyv/CfkgNhWZiE2CUy5OivnVUSsE="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:dKAabKeekUVdKOBdTApTdmysLKY=
X-Clacks-Overhead-header: GNU Terry Pratchett
Bytes: 1962

In article <w%JzO.33560$95o8.18523@fx09.iad>, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott
Lurndal) wrote:

> > Intel were all over RISC-V in 4Q2022 and 1Q2023, looking for 
> > something to compete with ARM after having accepted you can't 
> > get power:performance to match ARM out of x86-64. Then it all 
> > went quiet, and Intel didn't manufacture the SiFive SoC 
> > ("Horse Creek") that was supposed to blaze the trail for 
> > RISC-V as a consumer and/or enterprise architecture. 
> 
> The problem with this is that RISC-V isn't currently comparable,
> feature-wise, with ARMv8.0. To compete with Neoverse-N2 cores,
> they'll need to support a similar feature set - most of which 
> doesn't exist in the RISC-V design space yet.

Open-source design of the ISA has delivered an architecture suitable for
teaching, its original purpose, but has failed to promptly deliver the
dull-but-necessary features for large-scale systems? I'm shocked! 

Surely SiFive should have done this work, if they'd known what they were
doing in competing with ARM? 

John