RISC-V Is Sloooow

Re:RISC-V Is Sloooow by panick21_ on Wednesday March 11, 2026 @06:44AM (#47333916)

I'm not a lawyer but I would assume its copyright. Kind of like API in software. In software somehow this does not apply most of the time. But it seems in hardware this is very real. But I would appreciate a lawyer jumping in.

I know for example that Berkley when thinking pre-RISC-V that they had a deal with Intel about using x86-64 for research. But they were not able to share the designs.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:RISC-V Is Sloooow by MarsIronPI on Wednesday March 11, 2026 @08:42AM (#47334838)

I don't know why there aren't independent X86-64 manufacturers. Patents on the extensions maybe? But as I understand copyright, APIs can't be copyrighted so it's not that.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:RISC-V Is Sloooow by panick21_ on Wednesday March 11, 2026 @09:38AM (#47335434)

The original ARM 32 stuff is clearly out of patents and is not being copied. And it doesn't require new extensions to be commercially viable.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:RISC-V Is Sloooow by userbinator on Wednesday March 11, 2026 @08:40PM (#47344705)

and is not being copied

Are you sure, especially considering China?

I doubt there is any legal barrier, because there are a few existing projects with x86 cores on an FPGA, as well as some SoCs. Here's a 486: https://opencores.org/projects/ao486

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:RISC-V Is Sloooow by panick21_ on Thursday March 12, 2026 @04:49AM (#47348066)

Ok if China is doing something only for China market that tells you something.

As for opencores, yes you can design them, but do any companies making commercial products sell them?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:RISC-V Is Sloooow by sidewndr46 on Wednesday March 18, 2026 @11:35PM (#47434596)

I'm reasonably certain at least one Chinese fab has a license for some of AMDs older product lines

[ Parent | on HN ]