RISC-V wants to be the third major chip architecture. CEO Calista Redmond has a lot of work to do.

RISC-V backers think its open-source chip cores could be a viable alternative to chips made by Intel, AMD and Arm’s partners. It will be an uphill battle, but some chip makers are intrigued.

CEO Calista Redmond

RISC-V doesn’t have some of the problems that companies building around Nvidia and Arm do.

Photo: RISC-V

At the outset of Nvidia’s bold $40 billion purchase of chip design maker Arm, semiconductor engineers and executives viewed an open-source alternative called RISC-V as a potential backup option should Nvidia exert more control over Arm’s design philosophy. More than a year later, Nvidia’s deal has run into trouble, but the appetite for an alternative — such as RISC-V — has not waned.

Nvidia’s Arm deal has run up against one of the things that makes RISC-V attractive: techno-nationalism. The COVID-19 pandemic made clear that semiconductors are vital for a range of consumer goods but also national security. The U.S., for example, has a plan in the works to spend billions to ensure that the domestic capacity exists to manufacture a sufficient supply.

RISC-V also doesn’t have some of the problems that companies building around Nvidia and Arm do because it is open source: free of licensing fees, restrictions and reliance on companies such as Intel or Arm pushing research and development forward. Most importantly, no government has successfully intervened in its development so far.

RISC-V’s present and future path also doesn’t hinge on turning a quarterly profit to appease Wall Street. As a result, its technological future is shaped by other priorities as organizations and national governments are free to transform the underlying blueprints to suit their needs. And several, such as China, India and Russia, have decided to do so.

But RISC-V is unproven at scale, and is well behind rivals when it comes to the maturity of software built for its architecture. To dig into some of the considerations around adopting RISC-V and a host of other recent developments, Protocol caught up with CEO Calista Redmond at the organization’s RISC-V summit in San Francisco last week. In our conversation, Redmond discussed how widely the tech has been adopted and some of the reasons why startups, big business and governments are taking a chance on developing hardware around RISC-V.

This interview has been condensed and edited.

What are some of the signals RISC-V is gaining traction in the marketplace?

The entire silicon industry has been disrupted by RISC-V. Some larger organizations like Intel are getting in the boat, they want to participate, as has Nvidia. The fundamental shakeup of RISC-V in the industry is being watched carefully by public institutions, [by] startup companies, [by] thousands of engineers.

Look at the job postings for RISC-V. We have a venture capitalist on our board of directors [Eric Li of Chengwei Capital] who does nothing but invest in RISC-V. $22 billion is the level of venture capital investment now [Editor's note: from 2020 to 2022, Deloitte estimates VCs will deploy that amount], which surpasses the $21 billion VCs put into this segment from 2005 to 2016. RISC-V can truly be a kingmaker, and that’s why VCs are engaged and involved. They are saying, “Look at the trajectory of companies like SiFive.”

During your keynote address at the RISC-V summit in San Francisco, you said that there are currently roughly 2 billion RISC-V cores in the world. What does that mean?

That data is anecdotal and probably low because it’s just what we hear about from our various community members. But it means we have crossed that inflection point. We're no longer just considered as an option. We're actually being moved into production and companies making a strategic hardware decision for a generation of hardware. You can’t change your mind every six months like you can with software, you’re pretty much locked in. That’s because of how long the development cycle takes.

So that level of investment, that level of confidence in RISC-V as a strategic underpinning [means we have] really crossed the chasm. RISC-V will be the foundational block of compute across the spectrum from embedded to the enterprise and everything in between.

What makes RISC-V different, and what are its benefits compared with other instruction set architectures? What are the tradeoffs using it versus x86 or Arm?

The really critical distinction is with a proprietary architecture [such as x86 or Arm], which is a black box in most cases. With RISC-V you have full transparency, and transparency is the base layer of a highly secure technology, whether it’s hardware or software. RISC-V is highly secure because everything can be proven.

Our ecosystem growth has been accelerating to the point where it's not going to take the decades that it did for other architectures to amass their ecosystem of software, tools and other resources to design and build with. That’s the piece we’re playing catch up on. We’re not there yet, but we’re getting there very rapidly.

In some ways, folks have pointed to the other variables outside of the instruction set that you need to think about. What does my engineering team already know and love? They probably don't all know and love RISC-V, they probably have grown up on other architectures. That's where their wealth of experience and other customizations have been in. We have to make things portable from one architecture to another. And we've improved that dramatically.

Why is RISC-V important for the world, which already has two excellent processor architectures?

I’m not proposing that you go to your boss and say, "I’d like to throw out all the millions of dollars you’ve already invested in your existing product portfolio." That’s the day you hand in your badge. There are so many factors that go into an architecture decision. And ripping and replacing something you've already been doing for decades is not usually the place to start.

Where we see multinationals and startups and everything in between diving into the RISC-V pool is on new workloads, new capabilities, such as artificial and machine learning. If you add AI and ML to your enterprise data center, you don’t have a sunk investment already, and it’s worth taking a look at an alternative.

RISC-V doesn’t require you to take everything that’s in a pre-packaged black box, it’s an alternative that doesn’t require you to negotiate a proprietary license — which can take a good year and a half to two years — that requires you to take the whole package. RISC-V lets you choose something that gives you the design flexibility so you can get a differentiated product. Hyperscalers or cloud providers need to compete on the new piece that they’re bringing to an existing solution.

What about startups? Why would a young company take a chance on RISC-V?

There are more startups and design houses on RISC-V than any other architecture. So we already have become a formidable third option. They have no sunk investment. They’re not going to come at it with high volumes, with huge negotiating leverage. They need to start [with] something that has as few barriers to entry as possible but yet has tremendous growth opportunity. Internet of Things or embedded — those have been huge sweet spots for RISC-V startups, for example.

Look at the simplicity and the ability to actually modularly compose the solution you want rather than incrementally add on to a very large base, which profoundly simplifies and reduces the level of engineering might that you need to get to market. A lot of these variables go into a startup’s decision to take a RISC-V approach to a fast-growing green-field opportunity. For example, in automotive or autonomous vehicles, or consumer devices like chips in your toothbrush, or toaster or whatever, there are lots of these opportunities.

But there are those similar opportunities in enterprise in high-performance computing, and other scale-up type implementations.

One of the advantages about RISC-V you discussed was that it’s open source, unlike its rival major architectures. Why does an open-source architecture matter geopolitically?

The geopolitical nature of where technology has gone has been disappointing in some ways — but all [countries] want to have a great technical economy. Everyone wants to hold onto economic thought leadership on the global stage, everyone wants to be a leader, technology is getting a bit on the nationalist side of things. I’m not talking about any one country, either.

The tune has changed with things like open source, whether it’s software or hardware — it doesn’t matter. Folks want to use global standards, and globally open-source software and hardware because it has been an approach that brings nations together, and builds those bridges rather than tears us apart. And you see that time and again.

India has had a RISC-V strategy, the European Union is on board with its processor initiative. They’re heavily investing in RISC-V because it’s a running start — it’s a platform you can use to build your local technical economic leadership while also participating in global supply chains, global opportunities, global development partners and global markets. Russia is stepping up to that as well, and you see that in China too.


Apple's new payments tech won't kill Square

It could be used in place of the Square dongle, but it's far short of a full-fledged payments service.

The Apple system would reportedly only handle contactless payments.

Photo: Nathan Dumlao/Unsplash

Apple is preparing a product to enable merchants to accept contactless payments via iPhones without additional hardware, according to Bloomberg.

While this may seem like a move to compete with Block and its Square merchant unit in point-of-sale payments, that’s unlikely. The Apple service is using technology from its acquisition of Mobeewave in 2020 that enables contactless payments using NFC technology.

Keep Reading Show less
Tomio Geron

Tomio Geron ( @tomiogeron) is a San Francisco-based reporter covering fintech. He was previously a reporter and editor at The Wall Street Journal, covering venture capital and startups. Before that, he worked as a staff writer at Forbes, covering social media and venture capital, and also edited the Midas List of top tech investors. He has also worked at newspapers covering crime, courts, health and other topics. He can be reached at tgeron@protocol.com or tgeron@protonmail.com.

Sponsored Content

A CCO’s viewpoint on top enterprise priorities in 2022

The 2022 non-predictions guide to what your enterprise is working on starting this week

As Honeywell’s global chief commercial officer, I am privileged to have the vantage point of seeing the demands, challenges and dynamics that customers across the many sectors we cater to are experiencing and sharing.

This past year has brought upon all businesses and enterprises an unparalleled change and challenge. This was the case at Honeywell, for example, a company with a legacy in innovation and technology for over a century. When I joined the company just months before the pandemic hit we were already in the midst of an intense transformation under the leadership of CEO Darius Adamczyk. This transformation spanned our portfolio and business units. We were already actively working on products and solutions in advanced phases of rollouts that the world has shown a need and demand for pre-pandemic. Those included solutions in edge intelligence, remote operations, quantum computing, warehouse automation, building technologies, safety and health monitoring and of course ESG and climate tech which was based on our exceptional success over the previous decade.

Keep Reading Show less
Jeff Kimbell
Jeff Kimbell is Senior Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer at Honeywell. In this role, he has broad responsibilities to drive organic growth by enhancing global sales and marketing capabilities. Jeff has nearly three decades of leadership experience. Prior to joining Honeywell in 2019, Jeff served as a Partner in the Transformation Practice at McKinsey & Company, where he worked with companies facing operational and financial challenges and undergoing “good to great” transformations. Before that, he was an Operating Partner at Silver Lake Partners, a global leader in technology and held a similar position at Cerberus Capital LP. Jeff started his career as a Manufacturing Team Manager and Engineering Project Manager at Procter & Gamble before becoming a strategy consultant at Bain & Company and holding executive roles at Dell EMC and Transamerica Corporation. Jeff earned a B.S. in electrical engineering at Kansas State University and an M.B.A. at Dartmouth College.

Why does China's '996' overtime culture persist?

A Tencent worker’s open criticism shows why this work schedule is hard to change in Chinese tech.

Excessive overtime is one of the plights Chinese workers are grappling with across sectors.

Photo: VCG/VCG via Getty Images

Workers were skeptical when Chinese Big Tech called off its notorious and prevalent overtime policy: “996,” a 12-hour, six-day work schedule. They were right to be: A recent incident at gaming and social media giant Tencent proves that a deep-rooted overtime culture is hard to change, new policy or not.

Defiant Tencent worker Zhang Yifei, who openly challenged the company’s overtime culture, reignited wide discussion of the touchy topic this week. What triggered Zhang's criticism, according to his own account, was his team’s positive attitude toward overtime. His team, which falls under WeCom — a business communication and office collaboration tool similar to Slack — announced its in-house Breakthrough Awards. The judges’ comments to one winner highly praised them for logging “over 20 hours of intense work nonstop,” to help meet the deadline for launching a marketing page.

Keep Reading Show less
Shen Lu

Shen Lu covers China's tech industry.

Boost 2

Can Matt Mullenweg save the internet?

He's turning Automattic into a different kind of tech giant. But can he take on the trillion-dollar walled gardens and give the internet back to the people?

Matt Mullenweg, CEO of Automattic and founder of WordPress, poses for Protocol at his home in Houston, Texas.
Photo: Arturo Olmos for Protocol

In the early days of the pandemic, Matt Mullenweg didn't move to a compound in Hawaii, bug out to a bunker in New Zealand or head to Miami and start shilling for crypto. No, in the early days of the pandemic, Mullenweg bought an RV. He drove it all over the country, bouncing between Houston and San Francisco and Jackson Hole with plenty of stops in national parks. In between, he started doing some tinkering.

The tinkering is a part-time gig: Most of Mullenweg’s time is spent as CEO of Automattic, one of the web’s largest platforms. It’s best known as the company that runs WordPress.com, the hosted version of the blogging platform that powers about 43% of the websites on the internet. Since WordPress is open-source software, no company technically owns it, but Automattic provides tools and services and oversees most of the WordPress-powered internet. It’s also the owner of the booming ecommerce platform WooCommerce, Day One, the analytics tool Parse.ly and the podcast app Pocket Casts. Oh, and Tumblr. And Simplenote. And many others. That makes Mullenweg one of the most powerful CEOs in tech, and one of the most important voices in the debate over the future of the internet.

Keep Reading Show less
David Pierce

David Pierce ( @pierce) is Protocol's editorial director. Prior to joining Protocol, he was a columnist at The Wall Street Journal, a senior writer with Wired, and deputy editor at The Verge. He owns all the phones.


Spoiler alert: We’re already in the beta-metaverse

300 million people use metaverse-like platforms — Fortnite, Roblox and Minecraft — every month. That equals the total user base of the internet in 1999.

A lot of us are using platforms that can be considered metaverse prototypes.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

What does it take to build the metaverse? What building blocks do we need, how can companies ensure that the metaverse is going to be inclusive, and how do we know that we have arrived in the 'verse?

This week, we convened a panel of experts for Protocol Entertainment’s first virtual live event, including Epic Games Unreal Engine VP and GM Marc Petit, Oasis Consortium co-founder and President Tiffany Xingyu Wang and Emerge co-founder and CEO Sly Lee.

Keep Reading Show less
Janko Roettgers

Janko Roettgers (@jank0) is a senior reporter at Protocol, reporting on the shifting power dynamics between tech, media, and entertainment, including the impact of new technologies. Previously, Janko was Variety's first-ever technology writer in San Francisco, where he covered big tech and emerging technologies. He has reported for Gigaom, Frankfurter Rundschau, Berliner Zeitung, and ORF, among others. He has written three books on consumer cord-cutting and online music and co-edited an anthology on internet subcultures. He lives with his family in Oakland.


Lyin’ AI: OpenAI launches new language model despite toxic tendencies

Research company OpenAI says this year’s language model is less toxic than GPT-3. But the new default, InstructGPT, still has tendencies to make discriminatory comments and generate false information.

The new default, called InstructGPT, still has tendencies to make discriminatory comments and generate false information.

Illustration: Pixabay; Protocol

OpenAI knows its text generators have had their fair share of problems. Now the research company has shifted to a new deep-learning model it says works better to produce “fewer toxic outputs” than GPT-3, its flawed but widely-used system.

Starting Thursday, a new model called InstructGPT will be the default technology served up through OpenAI’s API, which delivers foundational AI into all sorts of chatbots, automatic writing tools and other text-based applications. Consider the new system, which has been in beta testing for the past year, to be a work in progress toward an automatic text generator that OpenAI hopes is closer to what humans actually want.

Keep Reading Show less
Kate Kaye

Kate Kaye is an award-winning multimedia reporter digging deep and telling print, digital and audio stories. She covers AI and data for Protocol. Her reporting on AI and tech ethics issues has been published in OneZero, Fast Company, MIT Technology Review, CityLab, Ad Age and Digiday and heard on NPR. Kate is the creator of RedTailMedia.org and is the author of "Campaign '08: A Turning Point for Digital Media," a book about how the 2008 presidential campaigns used digital media and data.

Latest Stories