4 ms·
So many RISC options and almost none for CISC. If you want yet another low power chip, then it makes sense. If, however, you want to get real on efficient cache
by restalis 9y ago
So many RISC options and almost none for CISC. If you want yet another low power chip, then it makes sense. If, however, you want to get real on efficient cache usage and a high instruction-per-execution ratio, just do yourself a favor and stop ignoring the costly experimenting results that the industry already paid for.
- Nomentatus 9y agoThis just doesn't match the research I've read. CISC wasn't about speed of execution, and x86 isn't an asset, there. (As I understand it Intel's expertise in compilers, emulation of CISC by RISC, and manufacturing are wonderful compensating factors.)