Can change the endianess at run time.
Their new cache architecture is very unusual. A CPU can use the cache from another chip. Data is stored encrypted.
;)
From an efficiency perspective does that mean the chip has to do both so worst of both worlds?
[I dont know much about the world of cpu design, these might be stupid questions]
The POWER ISA was used in PowerPC which was used for the successors of a few 68k machines (most famously the Macintosh) and in that case the OS was built for big-endian. So having big-endian support was key there.
As for endian shifts, technically every OpenPOWER chip goes big for every OPAL call into the low-level HAL, even if the OS is little. The overhead is minimal. I can't think of much application use for that, though (per-page endianness which some PowerPCs supported is much more useful).
The CPU probably works on just one endianess and convert the data format when reading from memory. The overhead is on kepping track when to do it. But Im speculating, havent looked into this.
The IBM Power is one implementation of the Power ISA.
The chips used on the mars rovers and nintendo Wii as ppc as well.
Yeah, Cortex and NVIDIA cores do (and probably quite some others).
However, Apple-designed recent cores don’t implement big endian support at all.
Is OpenPOWER trying to compete with RISC-V? Whats the benefit compared to modern ARM or x86_64 silicon & ISAs?
All this with fully open firmware, and an open ISA (as of the last couple years). The CPU implementation itself is not open, but all firmware and procedures for initializing the CPU are open. For people interested in that sort of thing, it's appealing as a practical computer with a full PCIe implementation with actually decent performance, compared to essentially every other open source platform.
What they're really missing is a midrange product for a midrange price. I can't blame them for avoiding the low end, but can't I get anything for less than $2000?
This seems to be universally true for all kinds of UNIX workstations and servers.
Repeat until the hardware is rare and worth something?
So while it's unfortunate, it's not a case of ignoring the low end deliberately but mostly flows from the economic realities of not having anywhere near the addressable market of x86 or ARM. The small community of ppc64(le) enthusiasts is very much hoping for a future where this changes, however small that chance might be...
IIRC some of the latest AMD boards to end up with coreboot support is using opterons from 2011-2013.
For what it's worth:
$ lscpu | head -5
Architecture: ppc64le
Byte Order: Little Endian
CPU(s): 160
On-line CPU(s) list: 0-159
Thread(s) per core: 4From my point of view it is interesting because it provides an alternative to x86 and ARM. The more competition, the better. Competition will push the hardware forward. Imagine we only had only one CPU architecture and one CPU maker.
We have far less CPU architectures than we used to have.