RISC-V Is Sloooow
marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl
RISC-V Is Sloooow
1–10 of 397 posts
Re: RISC-V Is Sloooow
#2Don't blame the ISA - blame the silicon implementations AND the software with no architecture-specific optimisations.
RISC-V will get there, eventually.
I remember that ARM started as a speed demon with conscious power consumption, then was surpassed by x86s and PPCs on desktops and moved to embedded, where it shone by being very frugal with power, only to now be leaving the embedded space with implementations optimised for speed more than power.
Re: RISC-V Is Sloooow
#3Don't blame the ISA - blame the silicon implementations AND the software with no architecture-specific optimisations. RISC-V will get there, eventually. I remember that ARM started as a speed demon with conscious power consumption, then was surpassed by x86s and PPCs on desktops and moved to embedded, where it shone by being very frugal with power, only to now be leaving the embedded space with implementations optimi…
IF you care to read the article, they indeed do not blame the architecture but the available silicon implementations.
Re: RISC-V Is Sloooow
#4Don't blame the ISA - blame the silicon implementations AND the software with no architecture-specific optimisations. RISC-V will get there, eventually. I remember that ARM started as a speed demon with conscious power consumption, then was surpassed by x86s and PPCs on desktops and moved to embedded, where it shone by being very frugal with power, only to now be leaving the embedded space with implementations optimi…
IF you care to read the article, they indeed do not blame the architecture but the available silicon implementations.
I did read it. A Banana Pi is not the fastest developer platform. The title is misleading.
BTW, it's quite impressive how the s390x is so fast per core compared to the others. I mean, of course it's fast - we all knew that.
And don't let IBM legal see this can be considered a published benchmark, because they are very shy about s390x performance numbers.
Re: RISC-V Is Sloooow
#5Don't blame the ISA - blame the silicon implementations AND the software with no architecture-specific optimisations. RISC-V will get there, eventually. I remember that ARM started as a speed demon with conscious power consumption, then was surpassed by x86s and PPCs on desktops and moved to embedded, where it shone by being very frugal with power, only to now be leaving the embedded space with implementations optimi…
IF you care to read the article, they indeed do not blame the architecture but the available silicon implementations.
But they didn't reflect that in a title like "current RISC-V silicon Is Sloooow" ...
Re: RISC-V Is Sloooow
#6Don't blame the ISA - blame the silicon implementations AND the software with no architecture-specific optimisations. RISC-V will get there, eventually. I remember that ARM started as a speed demon with conscious power consumption, then was surpassed by x86s and PPCs on desktops and moved to embedded, where it shone by being very frugal with power, only to now be leaving the embedded space with implementations optimi…
IF you care to read the article, they indeed do not blame the architecture but the available silicon implementations.
I keep checking in on Tenstorrent every few months thinking Keller is going to rock our world... losing hope.
At this point the most likely place for truly competitive RISC-V to appear is China.
Re: RISC-V Is Sloooow
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
IF you care to read the article, they indeed do not blame the architecture but the available silicon implementations.
I keep checking in on Tenstorrent every few months thinking Keller is going to rock our world... losing hope. At this point the most likely place for truly competitive RISC-V to appear is China.
> At this point the most likely place for fast RISC-V to appear is China.
Or we just adopt Loongson.
Re: RISC-V Is Sloooow
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
IF you care to read the article, they indeed do not blame the architecture but the available silicon implementations.
I did read it. A Banana Pi is not the fastest developer platform. The title is misleading. BTW, it's quite impressive how the s390x is so fast per core compared to the others. I mean, of course it's fast - we all knew that. And don't let IBM legal see this can be considered a published benchmark, because they are very shy about s390x performance numbers.
Which risc-v implementation is considered fast?
Re: RISC-V Is Sloooow
#9Is cross compilation out of the question?
Re: RISC-V Is Sloooow
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
IF you care to read the article, they indeed do not blame the architecture but the available silicon implementations.
I did read it. A Banana Pi is not the fastest developer platform. The title is misleading. BTW, it's quite impressive how the s390x is so fast per core compared to the others. I mean, of course it's fast - we all knew that. And don't let IBM legal see this can be considered a published benchmark, because they are very shy about s390x performance numbers.
I was really surprised by the s390x performance, but I also don't really understand why there are build time listed by architecture, not the actual processors.