Yes, the benefit of RISC-V I can see is that if a large company, let’s say intel, designs a high performance CPU, a small company can also create a compatible alternative CPU. I don’t think the small companies can really compete in performance with the large ones, even if you manage to create a good CPU once it’s not simply feasible to keep up with hundred times larger r&d teams in long term, but there is a place for the smaller CPUs filling specific niche use cases.
Now, let’s be clear, RISC-V is a loose definition of an instruction set. It’s free in the sense that you don’t need a license to design a CPU that uses it. However the actual CPU designs are no more free than any other ISA, they will be closely guarded IP of the companies that design them.
Also, since RISC-V includes a minimal base set (truly minimal of like 50 instructions that doesn’t even implement multiplication and division) and a large number of optional extensions and freedom to create new extensions, software compiled to one RISC-V processor doesn’t necessarily run on another. Hence, “ecosystem” people talk about might not happen.
Yes, the benefit of RISC-V I can see is that if a large company, let’s say intel, designs a high performance CPU, a small company can also create a compatible alternative CPU. I don’t think the small companies can really compete in performance with the large ones, even if you manage to create a good CPU once it’s not simply feasible to keep up with hundred times larger r&d teams in long term, but there is a place for the smaller CPUs filling specific niche use cases.