Re:Arm kills off its anti-RISC-V site after own staff revolt
by rwmj on Wednesday July 11, 2018 @06:10AM
(#17505717)
ARM are not worried that RISC-V will replace Cortex-A72. They license far more (by quantity and value) of the tiny Cortex-M embedded cores, and RISC-V can already replace just about every use of Cortex-M. The foolishness of this website was ARM telling everyone that RISC-V is a viable alternative. It could only have been worse if they'd provided a link to https://github.com/freechipsproject/rocket-chip
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Arm kills off its anti-RISC-V site after own staff revolt
by TomVDB on Wednesday July 11, 2018 @09:39AM
(#17506720)
Do you by any chance have concrete data or a source for the “by quantity and value” ?
I don’t doubt at all that it’s true, but I’d love to understand better what ARM’s exposure really is.
Re:Arm kills off its anti-RISC-V site after own staff revolt
by rwmj on Wednesday July 11, 2018 @10:19AM
(#17507110)
I don't have figures for revenue, but ARM break out their volumes by Cortex line here, see the first KPI spreadsheet:
Re:Arm kills off its anti-RISC-V site after own staff revolt
by TomVDB on Wednesday July 11, 2018 @11:25AM
(#17507636)
Summary units breakdown:
Classic ARM (7,9,11): 16%
Cortex-A: 19%
Cortex-R: 7%
Cortex-M: 58%
Of course, there is probably a large difference in licensing and royalty cost between the A series and the M series. Based on the numbers above, it wouldn’t surprise me if the A series results in higher revenue than the M.
Re:Arm kills off its anti-RISC-V site after own staff revolt
by rwmj on Wednesday July 11, 2018 @02:17PM
(#17509045)
Oh sure, but I still wouldn't feel happy telling my shareholders that circa 75% of my product volume could disappear. And if that happened it would necessarily leave Cortex-A vulnerable (the Innovator's Dilemma in action).