AtoZRanking

ARM vs RISC-V: Which Architecture Should You Care About?

1/28/2026 · CPUs · 6 min

ARM vs RISC-V: Which Architecture Should You Care About?

TL;DR

  • ARM is a mature, energy-efficient architecture with a huge ecosystem and broad software support. It powers most mobile devices and many laptops and servers.
  • RISC-V is an open ISA that enables customization, low cost, and rapid innovation. Its ecosystem is growing fast but is not yet as mature as ARM's for desktops and servers.
  • Choose ARM if you need immediate software compatibility, established tooling, and strong vendor support. Choose RISC-V if you value openness, custom extensions, and are targeting embedded or specialized designs.

What are these architectures?

  • ARM is an instruction set architecture with licensed implementations from companies like ARM Ltd, Apple, Qualcomm, and others. Vendors design chips using the ARM ISA and often add proprietary features.
  • RISC-V is an open standard ISA. Anyone can implement it without licensing fees, and designs can include custom extensions for specific needs.

Design philosophy

  • ARM: Focuses on power efficiency and a balance of performance and features. Commercial licensing encourages polished IP and turnkey solutions.
  • RISC-V: Emphasizes simplicity, modularity, and openness. The base ISA is small, with optional extensions for floating point, vector math, and more.

Performance and power

  • Both ISAs can be implemented across low-power microcontrollers to high-performance cores. Performance depends more on microarchitecture than the ISA itself.
  • ARM often wins in shipped performance because of decades of optimization and large investments by vendors. RISC-V is catching up, especially in niche and custom cores.

Ecosystem and software

  • ARM advantages:
  • Wide operating system support including Linux distributions, Android, iOS (hardware vendors), and many real-time OSes.
  • Mature compilers, debuggers, and vendor SDKs.
  • RISC-V state:
  • Rapidly improving toolchains and Linux support, with growing vendor SDKs.
  • Smaller pool of optimized commercial software and drivers compared to ARM.

Use cases

  • Mobile and mainstream laptops: ARM dominates due to performance-per-watt and vendor support.
  • Servers and cloud: ARM is present in some server CPUs. RISC-V is emerging but not yet a mainstream server choice.
  • Embedded and IoT: RISC-V offers strong advantages because of cost, customization, and license freedom. ARM Cortex-M class still has massive installed base.
  • Specialized accelerators: RISC-V shines for custom compute units and research prototypes where bespoke extensions matter.

Compatibility and toolchain

  • ARM benefits from decades of compiler and OS work. If you need broad binary compatibility and existing driver support, ARM is safer.
  • RISC-V requires more effort for peripherals and vendor-specific drivers. For new designs or greenfield projects, RISC-V can be attractive.

Security and extensions

  • ARM provides standardized security features like TrustZone on many cores and established secure firmware ecosystems.
  • RISC-V supports security extensions and custom security units. Openness allows inspection but means standardization varies by vendor.

Which should you pick?

  • Choose ARM if you want:
  • Mature software and driver support
  • Proven performance-per-watt for consumer devices
  • Low-risk path for laptops, tablets, and many servers
  • Choose RISC-V if you want:
  • No license fees and full openness
  • Custom instructions or lightweight embedded designs
  • Rapid prototyping and academic or specialized uses

Buying checklist

  • For consumer devices look for proven vendors and software updates.
  • For embedded projects consider development boards, toolchain availability, and community support.
  • For servers evaluate performance per watt, ecosystem maturity, and enterprise support.

Bottom line

ARM remains the pragmatic choice for most mainstream devices today thanks to a huge ecosystem and optimized implementations. RISC-V is an exciting, open alternative that is ideal for customization, low-cost embedded designs, and long-term innovation. Both architectures will coexist, and your choice should match your priorities: immediate compatibility and polish, or openness and flexibility.

Found this helpful? Check our curated picks on the home page.