News Arm to cancel Qualcomm's architecture license as feud intensifies

[bit_user]

I hope Qualcomm buys a permanent (No Royalties EVER) x86 License, just to spite ARM.

This might actually end up happening, if they do follow through on buying part of Intel, as the rumors have suggested.

That would be so awesome =D

I disagree.

Then we don't have to worry as much about software compatibility in the Windows OS world

I think there's a lot more at stake than that. I would prefer to see more CPU vendors and ISA options, not less. Even though I think RISC-V will ultimately win out, I don't want to see ARM give up the fight so quickly. Also, if there's consolidation between Intel and Qualcomm, that will have sweeping implications that broadly aren't in the interests of consumers, tech workers, or the US tech sector.

The only way to get that license is to acquire someone who already has one, and Intel might be troubled but not so much so that they're trying to sell the company.

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-i...e-offer-until-after-u-s-presidential-election
​

 

[bit_user]

So buying the license from VIA?

No, this wouldn't be allowed. One reason: Via is already partnering with Zhaoxin to make x86 CPUs for the Chinese market.

Qualcomm is one of, if not the #1 Client Vendors for ARM.

Imagine what kind of industry message it would send if Team x86 convinced them to swap sides.

That x86 was open up to new partner members like in the past when there was more competition.

The only way x86 represents any sort of "team" is in your mind. Just because Intel and AMD have formed a joint committee to steer the ISA doesn't mean they welcome other players. They're still competing, but I'll bet their big customers forced them to get on the same page in their ISA strategy.

Then, they can use that somehow to force MS to give up on having "ARM support" in Windows, and help solidify x86's hold on Windows.

MS will just work with MediaTek (and rumored others), instead.

 

[bit_user]

Remember when Nvidia was barred from purchasing ARM because they were expected to be anti-competitive with licensing?
I never thought ARM would pull the exact stunt without Nvidia at the helm.

If we lived in a much more regulatory-intensive universe, I could imagine ARM being forced to spin off its core design group, so that the only thing the parent company does is sell architecture licenses and provide contracting services for software & tools that support it.

There's an inherent conflict of interest in between designing & licensing your own cores, while selling architecture licenses which allow others to do the same. It's the sort of thing that could be allowed when you're small, but ARM has long passed the point of dominance in the phone sector (and increasingly in cloud), where they should probably be regulated more like a monopoly.

 

[GenericUser2001]

I checked again and yep it says arm are risc processors.Are they not compatible with risc V ? What am I missing there? Also even if ARM went to the x86 route wouldn't they have a lot more difficulty performing as well running a different eg: (windows os)? Seems modern windows would weigh ARM down quite a bit.I'm here to learn!

RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computer) is a design philosophy for computer instruction sets (basically the very low level instructions processors execute). ARM Holdings is a company that has created the ARM instruction set (well really several versions of said instruction set, it has been updated quite a bit over the decades) that originally followed that RISC design philosophy, though one could argue that the latest versions aren't really RISC anymore. ARM Holdings licenses out the ARM ISA (and specific CPU designs for said ISA) to a bunch of companies, including Qualcomm here. ARM Holdings is revoking Qualcomm's right to use the ARM ISA due to some contract disputes, hence the article that started this thread.

RISC-V is a different instruction set, intended to follow the RISC design ideals, and is owned by a non-profit organization. Anyone can use said instruction set for their chips without a fee. RISC-V is quite different the ARM instruction set, so no, you can't just switch over between the two. Because of this contract dispute, some people are suggesting that Qualcomm start work on RISC-V chips to avoid future issues like this.

Modern Windows does have an ARM version - you can buy laptop's using Qualcomm's Snapdragon Elite ARM chips right now (well at least until/if that ban goes through); software that has been recompiled to the ARM ISA runs quite well on those machines, software that has not been recompiled has to run through an emulator Microsoft has cooked up, and is a bit more hit & miss on if and how well it works.

 

[GenericUser2001]

Remember when Nvidia was barred from purchasing ARM because they were expected to be anti-competitive with licensing?
I never thought ARM would pull the exact stunt without Nvidia at the helm.

The current CEO of ARM Holdings, Rene Haas, is a former Nvidia employee. Perhaps him & Jensen are still in contact, or Jensen has some dirt on him from his Nvidia days?

 

[Lamarr the Strelok]

Thanks for the info generic user!

 

[jasonf2]

Given that "Hell has Frozen Over" recently when Intel & AMD decided to form the x86 Working Group together along with others, I'm willing to bet things might change about licensing to others if both parties agree to who gets invited into the x86 field.

I never thought I'd see Intel & AMD work together on the x86 Working Group, shows you what can happen if given a long enough time frame.

Right now is a huge opportunity for Team x86., especially given how MS has dabbled "Too Much" with ARM, if they can convince Qualcomm to come over to the Team x86 side, I'm sure there are other forces that can convince MS to close off their ARM developments, and keep nVIDIA out of the ARM on Windows potentially.

Short of nVIDIA paying a "Hefty license" to join team x86 and making x86 CPUs for Windows themselves.

Possibly. But on a side note the bigger issue here is really more about what X86 is and what Qualcomm produces that makes the whole thing very unlikely. ARM core designs are what they are today because they have developed around the SOC smartphone market and android ecosystem. Qualcomm for the most part makes its profits in that space. X86, while having advanced significantly, just hasn't proved efficient enough to make any usable market penetration into phones. Qualcomm moving to X86 would probably be about as disruptive to their business as really getting cut off from ARM, which I am going to be really surprised to see happen. This whole thing is contract negotiation posturing. Samsung has its own ARM license and they make their own chips. The only reason Qualcomm chips keep getting put into their phones is a performance lead for certain markets. Even if they could go to X86 I don't really see their clients following, especially with android being as ARM optimized as it is. This is also why Risc-v is problematic. Not impossible, just not very likely. The only reason I could see Risc-v being brought forward is the heavy handedness that ARM is showing towards licensing. The chip designers working in the ARM space right now are probably all worried how this plays out, especially with ARM having been almost bought by NVidia in the last couple of years. That purchase would have made the ARM architecture the new X86 island if Nvidia had pulled it off. Again all reasons for these companies to get away from X86/ARM and towards something open sourced like Risc-V. But doing that is going to be a huge risk of resources and require google and phone makers to be on board unless you are Apple and own your whole ecosystem.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Possibly. But on a side note the bigger issue here is really more about what X86 is and what Qualcomm produces that makes the whole thing very unlikely. ARM core designs are what they are today because they have developed around the SOC smartphone market and android ecosystem. Qualcomm for the most part makes its profits in that space. X86, while having advanced significantly, just hasn't proved efficient enough to make any usable market penetration into phones. Qualcomm moving to X86 would probably be about as disruptive to their business as really getting cut off from ARM, which I am going to be really surprised to see happen. This whole thing is contract negotiation posturing. Samsung has its own ARM license and they make their own chips. The only reason Qualcomm chips keep getting put into their phones is a performance lead for certain markets. Even if they could go to X86 I don't really see their clients following, especially with android being as ARM optimized as it is. This is also why Risc-v is problematic. Not impossible, just not very likely. The only reason I could see Risc-v being brought forward is the heavy handedness that ARM is showing towards licensing. The chip designers working in the ARM space right now are probably all worried how this plays out, especially with ARM having been almost bought by NVidia in the last couple of years. That purchase would have made the ARM architecture the new X86 island if Nvidia had pulled it off. Again all reasons for these companies to get away from X86/ARM and towards something open sourced like Risc-V. But doing that is going to be a huge risk of resources and require google and phone makers to be on board unless you are Apple and own your whole ecosystem.

Google is using RISC-V for it's custom AI in it's own silicon.

Given RISC-V just announced the ratification of RVA 23, very recently, that should give Google more incentive to bring support for RISC-V back to Android and that will help move Android along the path of RISC-V instead of ARM.

Especially if you can get Qualcomm to jump ship on Mobile Devices.

Personally, I want to see the two major BSD distributions of (FreeBSD & OpenBSD) to jump aboard and support RISC-V at a higher level.

Get everybody in the RISC-V community to push BSD ahead.

It's a fundamentally more secure OS with less baggage and less mess than Linux.

That would be nice if we can get BSD moving ahead, and even dragging some Linux folks along.

 

[bit_user]

Possibly. But on a side note the bigger issue here is really more about what X86 is and what Qualcomm produces that makes the whole thing very unlikely. ARM core designs are what they are today because they have developed around the SOC smartphone market and android ecosystem. Qualcomm for the most part makes its profits in that space. X86, while having advanced significantly, just hasn't proved efficient enough to make any usable market penetration into phones. Qualcomm moving to X86 would probably be about as disruptive to their business as really getting cut off from ARM, which I am going to be really surprised to see happen.

Yes, good point. Just as Apple sought to unify its smartphone and computing platforms, it would be weird for Qualcomm to pursue x86 for laptops, given that x86 tried & failed to penetrate the smartphone market. Therefore, Qualcomm would be pursuing x86 only for the computing market, while still having to retain focus on ARM for phones. Wouldn't make sense.

Samsung has its own ARM license and they make their own chips.

They fabricate their own SoCs, but they no longer design their own cores.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/15826/isca-2020-evolution-of-the-samsung-exynos-cpu-microarchitecture
​

This is also why Risc-v is problematic. Not impossible, just not very likely.

It'll happen. Android supports it; give it time.

The only reason I could see Risc-v being brought forward is the heavy handedness that ARM is showing towards licensing.

And China.

The chip designers working in the ARM space right now are probably all worried how this plays out, especially with ARM having been almost bought by NVidia in the last couple of years. That purchase would have made the ARM architecture the new X86 island if Nvidia had pulled it off.

The fact that multiple regulators rejected it should've put those same minds at ease. However, not enough to overcome Trump's weaponization of ARM's IP against Huawei and now ARM's belligerent licensing model towards architecture licensees.

Again all reasons for these companies to get away from X86/ARM and towards something open sourced like Risc-V. But doing that is going to be a huge risk of resources and require google and phone makers to be on board unless you are Apple and own your whole ecosystem.

Google is already there. You only need a handful of phone makers, to get the ball rolling. Might start in China or India, even.

P.S. you make good points. I just wish you'd organize them into more than one paragraph. It would make your posts more readable and easier for more people to appreciate.

 

[bit_user]

Google is using RISC-V for it's custom AI in it's own silicon.

Eh, custom AI chips are a different animal than phone SoCs or server CPUs.

Personally, I want to see the two major BSD distributions of (FreeBSD & OpenBSD) to jump aboard and support RISC-V at a higher level.

Do they not support it, already? I'm sure it'll receive first class support, if it's not there yet.

Get everybody in the RISC-V community to push BSD ahead.

No. Most RISC-V people won't care about BSD's and you can't make them. The BSD folks will naturally embrace RISC-V, I'm sure.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Do they not support it, already? I'm sure it'll receive first class support, if it's not there yet.

RISC-V gets Level 2 support on FreeBSD, not like Level 1 like x86 & ARM.

 

[bit_user]

RISC-V gets Level 2 support on FreeBSD, not like Level 1 like x86 & ARM.

As server CPUs and more laptops emerge that support it, I'm sure that'll change.

 

[jasonf2]

This might actually end up happening, if they do follow through on buying part of Intel, as the rumors have suggested.


I disagree.


I think there's a lot more at stake than that. I would prefer to see more CPU vendors and ISA options, not less. Even though I think RISC-V will ultimately win out, I don't want to see ARM give up the fight so quickly. Also, if there's consolidation between Intel and Qualcomm, that will have sweeping implications that broadly aren't in the interests of consumers, tech workers, or the US tech sector.

​

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-i...e-offer-until-after-u-s-presidential-election​

​

Also as a point of interest Intel owns an ARM license from back in the StrongARM days. I would be interested to know if Intel's contract language would put Qualcomm into the same lawsuit if they acquire Intel. As a sidebar as well it looks like Nvidia has started integration of Risc-v cores for controller infrastructure. While this isn't CPU/OS level it definitely should be a shot across ARM's bow with so much of their actual core integration being in infrastructure.

 

[bit_user]

Also as a point of interest Intel owns an ARM license from back in the StrongARM days.

How do you know it's still valid? I know they tend to have a long term, like 10 or 15 years, but I'd have expected it to expire by now. Also, AArch64 wasn't even a thing, back then.

Also, I think ARM issues architecture licenses for like ARMv8-A, which is one reason (or maybe someone just guessing) I read why Qualcomm's and Apple's own cores haven't yet gone to ARMv9-A.

it looks like Nvidia has started integration of Risc-v cores for controller infrastructure.

I thought they already did that like 6-7 years ago. Sometime around then, they gave a talk about RISC-V and how they opted to use it instead of licensing another 3rd party microcontroller.

While this isn't CPU/OS level it definitely should be a shot across ARM's bow with so much of their actual core integration being in infrastructure.

I think it was probably more consequential, back when Western Digital decided to design their own RISC-V based controllers. At the time, I seem to recall they maybe even said something about open sourcing the IP, but I don't know if they followed through on it or if I'm just misremembering.

 

[thestryker]

How do you know it's still valid? I know they tend to have a long term, like 10 or 15 years, but I'd have expected it to expire by now. Also, AArch64 wasn't even a thing, back then.

Also, I think ARM issues architecture licenses for like ARMv8-A, which is one reason (or maybe someone just guessing) I read why Qualcomm's and Apple's own cores haven't yet gone to ARMv9-A.

I'm sure Intel has multiple current Arm licenses due to fabs and FPGA, but I've not seen anything about an architecture license like Apple/Qualcomm/Samsung have. Intel hasn't made an in house Arm chip in almost 2 decades so I can't imagine any of that licensing would still be relevant even if valid.