Leading Semiconductor Industry Players Join Forces to Accelerate RISC-V

[TheLostSwede]

Semiconductor industry players Robert Bosch GmbH, Infineon Technologies AG, Nordic Semiconductor, NXP Semiconductors, and Qualcomm Technologies, Inc., have come together to jointly invest in a company aimed at advancing the adoption of RISC-V globally by enabling next-generation hardware development.

Formed in Germany, this company will aim to accelerate the commercialization of future products based on the open-source RISC-V architecture. The company will be a single source to enable compatible RISC-V based products, provide reference architectures, and help establish solutions widely used in the industry. Initial application focus will be automotive, but with an eventual expansion to include mobile and IoT.




At its core, RISC-V encourages innovation, allowing any company to develop cutting-edge, customized hardware based on an open-source instruction set. Further adoption of the RISC-V technology will promote even more diversity in the electronics industry - reducing the barriers to entry for smaller and emergent companies and enabling increased scalability for established companies.

The company calls on industry associations, leaders, and governments, to join forces in support of this initiative which will help increase the resilience of the broader semiconductor ecosystem.

The company formation will be subject to regulatory approvals in various jurisdictions.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[Dan.G]

Big names there. Hopefuly, this will decrease prices for some devices (like smartphones). Competition is always a good thing.
Could also lead to some interesting designs (something crazy, like 16 cores SoC CPUs).

 

[bug]

Initial application focus will be automotive, but with an eventual expansion to include mobile and IoT.

And there I was, thinking automotive is both mobile and IoT...

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

And there I was, thinking automotive is both mobile and IoT...

It SHOULDNT be IoT, but some people insist on connecting everything they have to the cloud at all times.

 

[L'Eliminateur]

And there I was, thinking automotive is both mobile and IoT...

nah, whole different world, subject to stringent certification and reliability needs, plus super long production lifetimes of >10yr

With RISC-V they stop having to pay ISA licenses to existing companies like ARM and MIPS enabling them to use the risc-v ISA which is very scalable up and down to enable more microcontrollers/cpu everywhere in the car network.

mobile and iot are consumer trash, disposable, abandoned in no time

 

[randomUser]

It SHOULDNT be IoT, but some people insist on connecting everything they have to the cloud at all times.

Of course we are.. to connect with home assistant of course.

 

[bonehead123]

Big names there. Hopefuly, this will decrease prices for some devices (like smartphones). Competition is always a good thing.

Big names for sure, all of which have 1 primary goal: to collect massive amounts of our money anyway they can...

And in this post-rona, inflation-fueled world, if you're expecting anything tech related to get cheaper just because of a change in ISA's or reductions of licensing fees, then I have some prime beachfront property **in central montana** that you should buy, like, yesterday, hehehe

 

[bug]

It SHOULDNT be IoT, but some people insist on connecting everything they have to the cloud at all times.

It SHOULD be IoT if you want to pull diagnostics out the car without the user having to send them in on a USB stick. And while we're not there yet, it should be IoT so that autonomous vehicles can talk to each other and coordinate.

But I'm with you about people using the cloud without grasping the implications.

 

[AnotherReader]

It SHOULD be IoT if you want to pull diagnostics out the car without the user having to send them in on a USB stick. And while we're not there yet, it should be IoT so that autonomous vehicles can talk to each other and coordinate.

But I'm with you about people using the cloud without grasping the implications.

One concern about IOT, at least for cars, is the deplorable state of security in the automotive software world. Having your car hacked won't be pleasant. I would rather have it be updated via USB.

 

[bug]

One concern about IOT, at least for cars, is the deplorable state of security in the automotive software world. Having your car hacked won't be pleasant. I would rather have it be updated via USB.

Yeah, well, security is pretty bad in a million places, not only in automotive. But the reason I said cars should be online is not for getting updates, it's about the manufacturer having access to sensor readings. They can see trends this way and do something about it when needed. Also, you can ask for assistance while on the road, long before you've spotted a service.

TL;DR There are drawbacks, but there are good reasons why you want a smart vehicle to be online.

 

[AnotherReader]

Yeah, well, security is pretty bad in a million places, not only in automotive. But the reason I said cars should be online is not for getting updates, it's about the manufacturer having access to sensor readings. They can see trends this way and do something about it when needed. Also, you can ask for assistance while on the road, long before you've spotted a service.

TL;DR There are drawbacks, but there are good reasons why you want a smart vehicle to be online.

I get the advantages, but IMO, the drawbacks are too great especially when they could get all that by connecting to the car when you're there for servicing.

As far as this news is concerned, it is a predictable consequence of ARM strong-arming its customers. Qualcomm, in particular, has the design chops to go its own way.

 

[L'Eliminateur]

As far as this news is concerned, it is a predictable consequence of ARM strong-arming its customers.

Yes, this is not to reduce customer pricing or benefit the customer in any shape or form, this is simply a move to cut costs, it's so they can sell the chips at the same prices as before without paying any royalty(to greed-fueled ARM).

 

[Denver]

Big names there. Hopefuly, this will decrease prices for some devices (like smartphones). Competition is always a good thing.
Could also lead to some interesting designs (something crazy, like 16 cores SoC CPUs).

Very unlikely in any near future, but they should start somewhere like smartwatches, EVs, IoT etc...

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

It SHOULD be IoT if you want to pull diagnostics out the car without the user having to send them in on a USB stick. And while we're not there yet, it should be IoT so that autonomous vehicles can talk to each other and coordinate.

But I'm with you about people using the cloud without grasping the implications.

OBD2 codes exist, and can be sent in a text message. In addition to the deplorable security of IoT devices, the last thing we need is a rapidly depreciating forced obsolescence device in tools that cost more then many people's yearly salaries, one that can be abused to oppress individuals by companies, TPTB, and any rando who manages to hack their way into these systems, which given how poorly they are updated will be easier then ever.

Yes, this is not to reduce customer pricing or benefit the customer in any shape or form, this is simply a move to cut costs, it's so they can sell the chips at the same prices as before without paying any royalty(to greed-fueled ARM).

I think price reductions would come from competition, the barrier to entry for RISC V would be low enough to make ARM look like x86 by comparison.

 

[ReallyBigMistake]

"Leading Semiconductor Industry Players"​

you mean the companies at the bottom of the barrel

 

[kondamin]

Is there a technical reason why something like a golden cove core can’t be whipped up in risc v?

 

[MentalAcetylide]

Big names for sure, all of which have 1 primary goal: to collect massive amounts of our money anyway they can...

And in this post-rona, inflation-fueled world, if you're expecting anything tech related to get cheaper just because of a change in ISA's or reductions of licensing fees, then I have some prime beachfront property **in central montana** that you should buy, like, yesterday, hehehe

Wth, I haven't seen that thing in your signature in years... is the author still doing stickdeath content?

 

[Minus Infinity]

Yeah, well, security is pretty bad in a million places, not only in automotive. But the reason I said cars should be online is not for getting updates, it's about the manufacturer having access to sensor readings. They can see trends this way and do something about it when needed. Also, you can ask for assistance while on the road, long before you've spotted a service.

TL;DR There are drawbacks, but there are good reasons why you want a smart vehicle to be online.

Yeah sure, then the pigs will want access to data to see if you've been speeding or whatever else they want. No thanks. Shove that. For every good reason to have this tech, there are worse reasons not to. It will always be abused.

 

[Fourstaff]

I think having an alternative to ARM is always good, at very least it will control the cost of licensing ARM. Not sure how this will pan out over time though.

 

[bonehead123]

Wth, I haven't seen that thing in your signature in years... is the author still doing stickdeath content?

AFAIK, the site was taken down sometime in 2016 because Rob didn't wanna continue paying his hosting company, but some of his more popular skits are available on the YT thingy

 

[bug]

Yeah sure, then the pigs will want access to data to see if you've been speeding or whatever else they want. No thanks. Shove that. For every good reason to have this tech, there are worse reasons not to. It will always be abused.

Oh wow, being fined for speeding... The horror!

 

[LabRat 891]

Here I was, all-aboard with the so-called 'experts' saying RISC-V was a dead end.

Initial application focus will be automotive, but with an eventual expansion to include mobile and IoT.

Yeah... No Thanks.

 

[R-T-B]

"Leading Semiconductor Industry Players"​

you mean the companies at the bottom of the barrel

TIL qualcomm is bottom barrel.

Yeah sure, then the pigs will want access to data to see if you've been speeding or whatever else they want. No thanks. Shove that. For every good reason to have this tech, there are worse reasons not to. It will always be abused.

I'd honestly love if everyone just drove the speed limit.

 

[kondamin]

TIL qualcomm is bottom barrel.


I'd honestly love if everyone just drove the speed limit.

Why not go full speed on an empty autobahn?

 

[AnotherReader]

Is there a technical reason why something like a golden cove core can’t be whipped up in risc v?

There's no technical reason, but there are economic reasons. Only three companies have proven that they can build such a core for the mass market: AMD, Apple, and Intel. Designing a big core takes time and effort which is directly proportional to money.