Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
China Open Source Hardware Technology

Chinese RISC-V Project Teases 2025 Debut of Freely Licensed Advanced Chip Design (theregister.com) 83

China's Xiangshan project aims to deliver a high-performance RISC-V processor by 2025. If it succeeds, it could be "enormously significant" for three reasons, writes The Register's Simon Sharwood. It would elevate RISC-V from low-end silicon to datacenter-level capabilities, leverage the open-source Mulan PSL-2.0 license to disrupt proprietary chip models like Arm and Intel, and reduce China's dependence on foreign technology, mitigating the impact of international sanctions on advanced processors. From the report: The prospect of a 2025 debut appeared on Sunday in a post to Chinese social media service Weibo, penned by Yungang Bao of the Institute of Computing Technology at the Chinese Academy of Sciences. The academy has created a project called Xiangshan that aims to use the permissively licensed RISC-V ISA to create a high-performance chip, with the Scala source code to the designs openly available.

Bao is a leader of the project, and has described the team's ambition to create a company that does for RISC-V what Red Hat did for Linux -- although he said that before Red Hat changed the way it made the source code of RHEL available to the public. The Xiangshan project has previously aspired to six-monthly releases, though it appears its latest design to be taped out was a second-gen chip named Nanhu that emerged in late 2023. That silicon ran at 2GHz and was built on a 14nm process node. The project has since worked on a third-gen design, named Kunminghu, and published the image [here] depicting an overview of its non-trivial micro-architecture.

Chinese RISC-V Project Teases 2025 Debut of Freely Licensed Advanced Chip Design

Comments Filter:
  • by ChunderDownunder ( 709234 ) on Wednesday January 08, 2025 @05:06AM (#65072049)

    Alibaba have previously open sourced their XuanTie riscv cores.

    This isn't the earth shattering news you're looking for.

    • Perhaps a comparison would be useful?

      It seems the key might be in the superlatives?

      • Perhaps a comparison would be useful?

        A comparison of both RISC-Vs to a high-end ARM like Apple's M4 would be very interesting.

        RISC-V in the data center would be revolutionary and benefit China. China should work toward a RISC-V ecosystem to rival ARM.

        • A comparison of both RISC-Vs to a high-end ARM like Apple's M4 would be very interesting.

          I'm curious if Apple will release the M5 or not due to the Daystrom failure stigma. Or perhaps they will just opt to name it the MI5 and throw in some surveillance and spying technology.

    • It is if you follow US attempts to prevent Chinese access to Risc-V because reasons. As with other sanctions, it'll end up with China having more of the sanctioned tech than they would have had without any sanctions.
    • by Misagon ( 1135 )

      Except that the XiangShan V3 "Kunminhu" is expected to offer three-four times the performance of a XuanTie T-Head C910, at the same clock speed.

      That is comparable to cores from Apple, AMD, Intel and Qualcomm.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      My understanding is that those are more application specific SoCs with various cloud features like AI accelerators on board. These are more general CPUs.

      The licence is very good too. Haven't looked at the Alibaba one but this is comprehensive.

  • If one watches what new boards come from MILK-V, and how fast their SBCs gain features (even with antiquated SoC drivers and antediluvian Linux kernels), this is not a surprise. RISC-V doesn't have the patent issues that ARM does, and is a tried and true ISA, where it has been used for keyboard controllers, and a lot of MCUs for a long time because they are relatively cheap, and with the architecture being able to go from 16 bits to 128 bits, it can be adapted to be a server-grade CPU.

    I am hoping China can

    • they have all been experiments

      the ISA is fine but there is a HUGE job actually scaling blocks like a branch predictor

      this is hard mathematics that uses traces... that relies a lot on previous experiments going wrong i.e. the size of the experiments and the number

      everything small is nothing like a complex system and previously would have been solved with specialised logic now the proven way is a MCU thats a Huge difference than a state of the art CPU

      often all the news is established companies using the ISA t

  • by BytePusher ( 209961 ) on Wednesday January 08, 2025 @06:48AM (#65072163) Homepage
    Who would have thought overly aggressive sanctions would result in domestic research and development? RISC-V won't have to beat existing architectures on performance, it just needs to be comparable enough in terms of energy efficiency.
    • Who would have thought overly aggressive sanctions would result in domestic research and development? RISC-V won't have to beat existing architectures on performance, it just needs to be comparable enough in terms of energy efficiency.

      If energy efficiency were the primary metric in data centers, we would probably be here talking about the world’s data centers slam full of Raspberry Pi Beowulf clusters running off solar panels.

      Performance does matter. Why do you think AMD and Intel are still rival competitors.

      • Raspberry Pi's aren't really very power efficient versus computing output. China has plenty of solar energy, but are actively improving the efficiency of every part of their grid. This isn't only for economic reasons. A more energy efficient and more distributed grid can keep the economy running in the event of a large war with an enemy that prides itself on and has a track record of widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure (the United States).
        • by Entrope ( 68843 )

          Raspberry Pi's aren't really very power efficient versus computing output.

          Good point -- which would change it to something like "If energy efficiency were the primary metric in data centers, we would probably be here talking about the worldâ(TM)s data centers slam full of Mac Mini Beowulf clusters running off solar panels." That would highlight that capital costs are another big driver, and that even as good as Rosetta 2 is, familiarity with the ISA is another big factor.

          • Many big companies like Google, Amazon, and Microsoft that have suitable resources currently use their own custom ARM processors in their data centers. For them they can afford to design and manufacture hundreds of thousands to millions of their own CPUs for power and efficiency reasons.
        • Raspberry Pi is not supposed to be. I am not sure how people keep misconstruing the goal of Raspberry Pi’s designs. They are not designed to be high performance. They are not designed to be the most power efficient. They are functional general purpose and lower cost designs mainly for purpose of teaching Computer Science. The fact of the matter is they have been good enough for a variety of purposes beyond this goal. When people complain about the deficiencies of these designs, many of them complain f
          • They are functional general purpose and lower cost designs mainly for purpose of teaching Computer Science.

            And Computer Engineering, don't forget the hardware side. It's an inexpensive single board Linux but it's also embedded Linux with tons of GPIO, I2C, SPI, etc for hardware. And it can power some of these attached devices to a degree.

        • Raspberry Pi's aren't really very power efficient versus computing output. China has plenty of solar energy,...

          Yet they are burning coal as fast as they can dig it up and import it. Coal usage is still on an upwards trend. Solar is supplementing coal, not displacing it.

          "Share of coal in emissions 79% of total CO2 emissions from fuel combustion, 2022
          Share of coal in electricity 61.7% of total electricity generation, 2022"
          https://www.iea.org/countries/... [iea.org]

          "China accounted for 95% of the world’s new coal power construction activity in 2023"
          https://www.carbonbrief.org/ch... [carbonbrief.org]

          "China’s coal-fired po

          • Not true: https://www.carbonbrief.org/an... [carbonbrief.org]
            • by drnb ( 2434720 )

              Not true: https://www.carbonbrief.org/an... [carbonbrief.org]

              Sorry, it is true. You are not using an absolute metric as I am, you are using a percentage. Coal and solar use are both increasing. Therefore supplementing not displacing. The percentage metric is decreasing because solar is increasing faster than coal. But coal is still increasing.

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          It's also a huge export opportunity. Billions of people are going to get new electricity grids this century, and they are going to copy the Chinese model of being well distributed and interconnected.

          Europe could have done it, but we were too slow.

    • RISC-V is going to dominate the microcontroller industry. Chips cost literally nothing.

      50 of them for $1.34 https://www.aliexpress.us/item... [aliexpress.us]

      • Chips cost literally nothing.

        Stop using "literally" to mean "figuratively" (the opposite of literally).

        Literally [wikipedia.org]

        50 of them for $1.34

        $1.34 is not "nothing".

      • RISC-V is going to dominate the microcontroller industry. Chips cost literally nothing.

        50 of them for $1.34 ...

        They are free with the Raspberry Pi Pico microcontroller. The Pico 2 has been recently released, like the original it is ARM based, dual core. However there was a surprise addition, they added dual core RISC-V to the microcontroller, No price increase. Now it only run one dual core or the other, it selects ARM or RISC-V based on the the code that is flashed to it.

        I'm really hoping they do the same with the full Raspberry Pi SBC.

    • by drnb ( 2434720 ) on Wednesday January 08, 2025 @11:43AM (#65072783)

      Who would have thought overly aggressive sanctions would result in domestic research and development?.

      Trump's sanctions against China were retaliatory, not protectionist. In other words they were the proper use of sanctions again an unfair trading partner. Not unfair in terms of dollars or amount of goods/services, but unfair in terms of openness, unfair in terms of predatory behavior.

      That is why Biden kept them, an extremely rare point of agreement for a man prone to undue anything Trump had done. They were appropriate, and sill are.

      • Sure, my only point is that they aren't strategically effective and in turn end up making China a stronger adversary rather than a stronger economic collaberator.
        • by drnb ( 2434720 )

          Sure, my only point is that they aren't strategically effective and in turn end up making China a stronger adversary rather than a stronger economic collaberator.

          I don't think so. Advanced chips through legacy chips are on the CCP's list of strategic technologies where the "plan" calls for domestic design and manufacturing.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Even if that was true, what has the practical outcome been? Have they corrected this unfair advantage, or have they just given China an even bigger advantage by making US products less attractive?

        In a couple of years people will be complaining that China unfairly gives away its IP. Open source will be declared communist, which is hilarious when you think about it.

  • Things have become far too stagnant anyways and Risk-V could change that. That it is China that makes these advances is no surprise. The West essentially forced them to do it.

    • by gtall ( 79522 )

      China would be doing it regardless of Western sanctions. Have you not been listening to Xi and the Parasites (a new rock group) from the CCP over the years?

      • by gweihir ( 88907 )

        I have a working mind. You do not seem to.

        • I have a working mind. You do not seem to.

          Actually he is correct. CPUs and MCUs are on the strategic technology list, things that are supposed to become domestically designed and manufactured according to CCP planning. It's a smart thing to do. Which is why the US and EU are starting to think/move about the design and sourcing of critical, and legacy, chips.

      • I think people in the west do not listen/read to Xi.
        What is CCP btw?

        • by _merlin ( 160982 )

          What is CCP btw?

          An informal abbreviation for Communist Party of China, primarily used in the US. Surely you know that.

    • Indeed - and now it leaves the West with a difficult decision to make. That is, if this new chip is good, should the West use it? Should the West get the benefit of it? If you're worried about 5G equipment, you should surely be worried about a CPU, so is it safe for the West to use? Is there a way to validate it?

      Had the West created this innovation, we'd all be using it with abandon. We'd have maintained a certain level of 'control', and if anyone was planting anything nefarious in it, it would have been us

      • by gweihir ( 88907 )

        What do you mean, "decision"? Of course if that design is good, it will be used. All that 5G and "network equipment" panic is artificial and based on lies. The thing is, both 5G equipment and network equipment can and surely have been carefully examined for backdoors. The result of that is that US equipment (Cisco) is likely backdoored, thinly camouflaged as an incredible series of security-bugs and that major Chinese equipment that gets exported is not backdoored. Or we would have heard about it. Instead,

  • by Qbertino ( 265505 ) <moiraNO@SPAMmodparlor.com> on Wednesday January 08, 2025 @08:03AM (#65072277)

    ... vis-a-vis China. It forces them to take alternative routes and makes FOSS hardware a viable option. Hence big chinese money investing in it.

    What would be totally hilarious if this actually pushes China ahead in the mid- and long-term, because they are forced to optimize along different metrics rather ever smaller scale of lithography or other cutting-edge and sanctioned stuff. After all, if you stay above and around the 20nm scale, you can produce comparatively cheap these days and don't need high end production hardware. In the end China might have cheap, manifold and robust premium-grade open source chipsets that roll up the market from below when the world runs out of some high-end microdevice that is critical to many industries.

    I'm hoping for truly FOSS hardware and if China helps us get there I don't really have a problem with that.

    • What would be totally hilarious if this actually pushes China ahead in the mid- and long-term, because they are forced to optimize along different metrics rather ever smaller scale of lithography or other cutting-edge and sanctioned stuff. After all, if you stay above and around the 20nm scale, you can produce comparatively cheap these days and don't need high end production hardware.

      Yes, but what you do wind up needing is a larger power budget to run the hardware, which means more nuclear and/or coal plants in China.

    • by bill_mcgonigle ( 4333 ) * on Wednesday January 08, 2025 @09:42AM (#65072517) Homepage Journal

      Yes, but Biden's recent sanctions have named Tencent and Huawai as Chinese Military entities so Linux Foundation (currently US) has to ban almost all the Chinese contributors to linux.

      Linus went on little celebratory racist tear when they banned Russians but now the Russian and Chinese linux developers are likely to fork an EastLinux kernel and probably the RISC-V work will land there predominantly.

      I think LF should move to Switzerland but for now we're going to have a ton of chaos to contend with due to these sanctions.

      It's unlikely Trump will reverse hostility to China but maybe DoD can convince him how destroying linux is bad for NatSec.

      • It's unlikely Trump will reverse hostility to China but maybe DoD can convince him how destroying linux is bad for NatSec.

        The hostility is bilateral, predatory even from China. Those Trump sanctions, that even Biden kept - amazing considering how he hates anything Trump had done, are retaliatory in nature not protectionist. Unfair trade, in the openness sense not dollar amount sense, and predatory behavior based. A proper use of sanctions. Trumps position on trade is basically reciprocal. If you are open we are open, if you are closed to a degree we are closed to a degree, ... you chose, we reciprocate.

      • by dajalas ( 244809 )

        RE: "It's unlikely Trump will reverse hostility to China but maybe DoD can convince him how destroying linux is bad for NatSec"

        Maybe Musk can translate the situation for Trump, and reduce tech-related trade sanctions, but I expect Chinese FOSS HW is a done deal.

      • I'm pretty sure if there is a trusty Kerneldev in mainland Russia they will find a way to merge his code, and if it's only his Californian buddy doing the merges for him. At this level, sanctions are basically a non-issue.

        Aside from that, most Russian devs and IT experts are expats by now. I spent New Year's with a whole bunch of them in northern Germany. Me and my buddy were a minority, everyone was speaking Russian.

        They're from all over the place: Berlin, Cyprus, Sofia, Sicily, the Baltic, Turkey ... Just

    • China is also all-in on the industry version of the IoT. That's all about remote control of industrial plant and equipment, sensors, actuators, robotics etc. To scale that they need tons of cheap silicon, but not necessarily high density silicon.

      It's also why their GPS-equivalent has 10cm2 resolution in civilian mode plus capacity for high density data packet transmissions - ideal for control of roaming robotic equipment.

  • ...but the documentation is only in Chinese.
    • Then copy paste it into google translate.

      Or look for a Chinese site to translate it.

      Google is actually absurdly awful in translating. Only Facebook is worth!

      • How long would it take me to reword documentation such that it cant be effectively translated into the enemy language via the available automated tools

        Maybe 5 minutes?
        • Unlikely. Especially if one of the target languages uses Hanzi/Kanji.

          Or - in general - if an Asian language is involved.

          Of course, you could "prompt" that to an "AI" (LLM) and try your luck. Would be interesting to know your results.

  • Until they publish their GDSII files, I am not going to call a CPU "Open Source". What they and everyone else publish WRT to RISC-V is too high level to translate into something really useful.

While money doesn't buy love, it puts you in a great bargaining position.

Working...