A roadmap revealed in Arm litigation points to Qualcomm exploring RISC-V processors for data centres and smartphones, signalling a shift from experimental projects to strategic planning by major chipmakers.
Jon Peddie Research has used its latest RISC-V market update to argue that the architecture is moving into a more commercially serious phase, one shaped less by start-up experimentation than by established chipmakers seeking greater control over their roadmaps and customer relationships. The report says the strongest interest is now around integrated platforms and application-specific silicon, while persistent obstacles remain in software maturity, the scale of investment required, and the difficulty of turning technical flexibility into profit.
A notable example cited by the company is a Qualcomm roadmap that surfaced in litigation with Arm. According to JPR, the documents indicate possible RISC-V processors for data centres in 2029 and for value smartphones in 2029, followed by premium handsets in 2031. JPR says the material offers unusually direct evidence that a Tier 1 supplier is treating RISC-V as part of long-range strategic planning, rather than as a speculative side project.
David Harold, senior analyst at JPR, said the next stage of RISC-V adoption is likely to be driven by large semiconductor firms using the architecture to reshape commercial terms, not simply by newcomers challenging incumbent processor vendors. He added that the Qualcomm roadmap was an important signal of strategic interest, but stressed that a competitive processor platform requires far more than an open instruction set.
The broader message is consistent with JPR’s recent market updates. Earlier reports in 2025 and 2026 described a shift away from open-ended customisation towards hardened, platform-based products, with value concentrating in long-term integration contracts rather than low-fee core licensing. JPR’s latest assessment extends that argument by saying open architecture does not automatically mean commercial independence: even if companies reduce reliance on a single instruction-set owner, they can become dependent on software stacks, integration tools and platform suppliers instead. Harold said the industry now has to prove who can translate architectural freedom into products that customers will adopt and support at scale.
Disclaimer: This content is intended for informational purposes only. Readers are advised to exercise their own judgement, conduct due diligence, or consult a qualified expert before acting on any information provided.
