Who uses the term '3rd world' 'third world' anymore?
It's Global South now. A Global South embedded engineer.
Both the old and new forms are clumsy approximations; Trinidad & Tobago is (are?) in the northern hemisphere.
A third world engineer responds to “RISC-V: They should have known better”
181–190 of 350 posts
Re: A third world engineer responds to “RISC-V: They should have known better”
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. Intel and AMD have proven that if you throw enough money at the problem, you can make fast microarchitectures despite a flawed ISA, and in many ways RISC-V is less flawed than x86. The things we are debating here are more along the lines of minor nitpicks. The main roadblock to the existence of fast RISC-V cores is the entrenchment of large x86 and arm ecosystems.
> The main roadblock to the existence of fast RISC-V cores is the entrenchment of large x86 and arm ecosystems. I'd disagree with that, their existence and decades of a head start mean they've been much more well invested but that's one of the things we're starting to see change, even if it's because of what would appear to be political motivations. We're starting to see a lot of investment into it in China because i…
You aren't disagreeing with the existence of the roadblock, just how hard it is to overcome.
And yes, there is a bunch of funding being pumped into it. I do have hope that some kind of RISC-V linux workstation will be viable in the next 5 years, without sacrificing too much performance or my wallet. I just wouldn't expect that to translate into making inroads into existing markets where x86 and arm have moats, like android/apple smartphones and more typical desktop/laptop workloads (even on linux).
I wouldn't count the AI/GPU stuff, those are generally pretty simple RISC pipelines with large vector units. Though TensTorrent do actually have a high-performance out-of-order rva23 core [1] that would be able to compete in this space. They are currently selling it as a "core for agentic workloads"
Re: A third world engineer responds to “RISC-V: They should have known better”
#183Re: A third world engineer responds to “RISC-V: They should have known better”
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
>HN hasn't been Bay Area centric in years. Honestly, most comments and usership on the platform seems to now align with DACH. I honestly do not get this at all. HN remains very US-centric to me, and especially centric to the mindshare of the Bay Area's IRL conversations, and apart from some takes on tech rights, does not really remind me of my experience in DACH.
> I honestly do not get this at all. HN remains very US-centric to me, and apart from some takes on tech rights, does not really remind me of my experience in DACH. The majority of HN's usership, posting, and comment activity occurs during peak EU work hours (3am-9am), stylistic patterns that are common for German-, French, and Polish-native speakers are increasingly prominent (eg. periods and spaces instead of comma…
This completely aligns with other analytics I have.
Re: A third world engineer responds to “RISC-V: They should have known better”
#185I think he's kind of speaking past the original author. The original piece is basically about how the author doesn't think that RISC-V will take off outside embedded, because of some design decisions that lead to poor performance compared to ARM64 and because so much of the ISA being optional means that there's too much fragmentation to make binary distribution feasible. Meanwhile, this piece is mainly about how RISC…
First, im a big fan of what riscV has brought into the world; 0.50 cent processors with radios that can reach a kilometer, 8 cent MCUs that you can put anywhere because they are basically free, 8 dollar Linux computers, and 1 dollar WiFi nodes that can run reasonable applications. And also, the first application capable chip you can actually trust to be free of unpublished capabilities.
RiscV is going to win despite its limitations, simply because they can be worked around freely, and the cost per core is zero. Every major company will be making their own flavor, because it’s the only way they can economically own the product of their work. Not many companies can be Qualcomm or Apple, but when a company invests millions in an architecture, they want it to be an asset on -their- balance sheet. It may not be the best starting point, but it’s the only journey that ends in ownership without starting from scratch.
X86 had dominance for decades not because it’s the best architecture, but because it was the best choice. RiscV doesn’t have to be the best architecture to be the best choice for companies to build on.
Re: A third world engineer responds to “RISC-V: They should have known better”
#186I think he's kind of speaking past the original author. The original piece is basically about how the author doesn't think that RISC-V will take off outside embedded, because of some design decisions that lead to poor performance compared to ARM64 and because so much of the ISA being optional means that there's too much fragmentation to make binary distribution feasible. Meanwhile, this piece is mainly about how RISC…
Well the original article is also about RISC-V isn't a great ISA for embedded either, and how that's supremely disappointing because there's no inherent reason why the designers couldn't have learned from decades of ISA research and made it suck even a little less. OP doesn't even defend the ISA committee (unlike HN, somehow...)
As much as people complain about warts in other ISAs like x86, their design decisions made sense back when they were made (or at least, no one really knew better)
Re: A third world engineer responds to “RISC-V: They should have known better”
#187I believe there will come a day when RISC-V has comparable or better performance than ARM and x86_64.
This is based on history: I remember when x86 performance compared to the DEC Alpha, PA-RISC, SPARC, etc. was a joke. There was a time when, if you wanted real performance, you needed to pony up $20,000-$50,000 for a workstation with a MIPS/PA-RISC/SPARC/Alpha/whatever processor. All these workstations smoked the x86 computers of the era.
However, people were buying x86 computers at a far higher rate, giving Intel (and AMD) the money needed to invest in better chip designs and better fabs. Linux was, at the same time, gaining traction and, around the time the dot-com bubble popped and there were no longer companies with the money needed to get Sun SPARC workstations (or what not) at $50,000 or more a pop to start up a web business, x86 computers running Linux had nearly the same performance at a much lower price. Once the Itanium sank and x86_64 was mainstream, x86_64 was the ISA of choice for performance workstations and servers, and the RISC ISAs that survived were now mainly used in the embedded space. Indeed, ARM was never a high performance RISC processor, and it was the one that took over the embedded space while PA-RISC, Alpha, and SPARC died.
The ISA for what were cheap computers become the highest performance ISA around.
It has been only in the 2020s that RISC processors have gotten x86_64 levels of performance, notably in the the Apple M series of processors. So now ARM, an ISA which was geared for cheap embedded devices, has become a high performance processor, in line with x86.
Right now, RISC-V is mainly being used in cheap embedded components. Considering that x86 and ARM also were made for cheap computing, until becoming the dominant high end processor, history tells us that the cheapest ISA is the one which will become the highest performance one.
RISC-V currently has about the same performance as a high end Raspberry Pi. I predict it will have medium-level PC performance by the end of the 2020s.
Re: A third world engineer responds to “RISC-V: They should have known better”
#188This blog post is very defensive and argumentative, which I guess is fair considering Dmitry's post is similarly inflammatory, but most of it was really not convincing: > Simply put, the things a high-end CPU needs are diametrically opposed to the things a small cost-saving microcontroller core needs. > The conclusion he draws is that no single ISA can serve both ends, and that RISC-V fans are fooling themselves, in…
the author just focused on his personal experiences regarding RISC-V and what he's been able to see himself as an embedded developer. there's already RISC-V SBCs that are on par with the Raspberry Pi 5 and in terms of IPC the best RISC-V cores are only lagging 5 years or less behind the best x86 and ARM cores.
5 years ago was Apple M1/M2 and AMD Zen 3. What RISC-V cores are remotely competitive with that?
Re: A third world engineer responds to “RISC-V: They should have known better”
#189I think he's kind of speaking past the original author. The original piece is basically about how the author doesn't think that RISC-V will take off outside embedded, because of some design decisions that lead to poor performance compared to ARM64 and because so much of the ISA being optional means that there's too much fragmentation to make binary distribution feasible. Meanwhile, this piece is mainly about how RISC…
First, im a big fan of what riscV has brought into the world; 0.50 cent processors with radios that can reach a kilometer, 8 cent MCUs that you can put anywhere because they are basically free, 8 dollar Linux computers, and 1 dollar WiFi nodes that can run reasonable applications. And also, the first application capable chip you can actually trust to be free of unpublished capabilities. RiscV is going to win despite…
Can you list the actual chips you’re referring to and additional sources to follow? I’ve finally started playing with ESP32 and recently getting curious about the smallest possible things out there. Also
Re: A third world engineer responds to “RISC-V: They should have known better”
#190I don't really understand the author's conclusions about cost and shipping, and how RISC-V is cheaper and more accessible to people outside the US and Europe. He first talks about how getting $1 worth of chips can cost $60-$200 in shipping for him due to his location... but then by the end claims that RISC-V gives him "an architecture that arrives in my country at ten cents a part". I don't get how both things can be…
The other thing he doesn't mention is time, I live in AoNZ and we do get free shipping from Digikey if we order over a minimum (~$60US) - but the big deal is time - you have to order everything you need ahead of time and get it all to arrive - miss one thing and you're stuck with a PCB and a box of bits and are sitting on your hands for a couple of weeks - you have to be incredibly organised - it's why I have a cabinet of SMD reels most of which I'll never use (reels of common components are ~$2 while visiting Shenzhen a couple of hundred $$ saves you a bunch of pain)
Living in the US and having free overnight delivery is 1st world luxury