@y_sasaki, you raise an interesting point. Yes, perhaps, what the core achitecture won't matter that much.
If so, I am wondering that some system vendors prefer a particular SoC because that particular SoC vendor might offer a lot of support (and handholding). Then, the decision on an SoC rests on the amount of [free] support OEMs can get...
When we pick a SoC for a product, we pay more attention to peripheral support, low power mode support, supply chain stability and price, rather than core architecture difference. As long as good devtool (compiler/debugger) and middleware (RTOS / device drivers / protocol stacks) are supported, core architecture difference do not mean much.
And as you know, ARM/Cortex chip manufactures / middleware providers / devtool providers have established great ecosystem for embedded applications. I think it is a major challenge for chiniese MIPS manufactures if they can provide such support foundation, rather than just to provide (even cheap, highly integrated, high-performance) silicon.
Its MIPS-based processing core's low-power profile aside, Imagination's MIPS technology "will need to get adopted by a major chip supplier in order to have the best chance of breaking in," says Francis Sideco, senior director of Consumer, Mobile, and IT Electronics at IHS.
I would certainly consider Microchip (which uses MIPS cores in multiple product lines) to be a "major chip supplier" !
Replay available now: A handful of emerging network technologies are competing to be the preferred wide-area connection for the Internet of Things. All claim lower costs and power use than cellular but none have wide deployment yet. Listen in as proponents of leading contenders make their case to be the metro or national IoT network of the future. Rick Merritt, EE Times Silicon Valley Bureau Chief, moderators this discussion. Join in and ask his guests questions.