Platforms
Platform comparison
A useful comparison begins with the workload and separates architecture, form factor, software support, maturity, assurance and supply.
Overview
A useful comparison begins with the workload and separates architecture, form factor, software support, maturity, assurance and supply. The same ‘CHERI’ label can describe very different embedded, application-class, simulated and research environments.
Best fit
A transparent matrix makes hidden dependencies visible before time or money is committed.
Text-only comparison method
Compare candidate platforms in this order: intended workload; processor architecture; form factor; operating-system support; toolchain support; compartment model; assurance evidence; current availability; supplier support; and last verification date.
Classify each option as foundational, experimental, a development platform, commercially available, or announced and planned. Verify the classification against a dated provider source before procurement.
What to evaluate
1. Technical fit
Compare compute, memory, peripherals, real-time needs, CHERI features, ABI and compartment model.
2. Ecosystem fit
Compare toolchain, OS, libraries, debugger, documentation, examples and skills.
3. Adoption fit
Compare availability, licence, supplier support, assurance evidence, roadmap and migration path.
Check current status
Avoid numerical scoring that hides mandatory requirements. Record source, date and confidence for every time-sensitive entry.
Verify availability, maturity, specifications, software support and lifecycle terms with the current platform owner before procurement.