• oo1@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think that’s the whole point of all risc - it saves power over cisc but may take longer to compute some tasks.

    That’d be why things like phones with limited batteries often prefer risc.

    • jdaxe@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s true for small and simple microcontrollers, but larger and more complicated ones can theoretically implement macro operation fusion in hardware to get similar benefits as CISC architectures

    • duncesplayed@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It definitely could scale up. The question is who is willing to scale it up? It takes a lot less manpower, a lot less investment, and a lot less time to design a low-power core, which is why those have come to market first. Eventually someone’s going to make a beast of a RISC-V core, though.

        • intrepid
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          China is the main driver of growth in RISC-V currently. But we need to see how the trade wars will affect that. There was a recent news about RISC-V specifically in this regard.

          We might also see more activity from Intel, Qualcomm and Nvidia.

        • merthyr1831@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Excl. Nation-states which have their own strategic reasons- NVidia, Google, Amazon, IBM, almost every single big cloud player are going to begin investing in RISC-V as it matures.

          ARM charges a lot for its licensing and that’s only going up in the near future. x86 is simply too expensive to compete for unless you’re AMD or Intel.

          At some point the Cloud CPU players are gonna jump on RISC for the cost savings, and the prospect of building their own platforms without licensing fees and lack of input on the direction of the ISA.