4 ms·

The code density of x86 is not particular great.

• throwaway81523 6y ago
  Well ok, I'd be interested in seeing a code density comparison between Riscv-IMC and whatever you want to compare it with. Vax density wasn't that great either, though maybe compilers back then weren't as good as now.
  • sprash 6y ago
    RISC-V doesn't even match ARM's levels when pulling extra tricks and extensions designed to improved code density. Other ISA's like AVR32 beat ARM by 50% which means it is more than possible to beat ARM. As I said, RISC-V is designed like a typical early 90s ISA when memory latency was not a concern. It will never be used in high performance general computing for that reason alone.
    • brucehoult 6y ago
      32 bit RISC-V code density is slightly worse than Thumb2, but better than any other 32 bit ISA I'm aware of with similar performance. I don't know much about AVR32 except that it is very dead. Some ISAs designed explicitly for microcontroller use have denser code than RISC-V and Thumb2 on things such as manipulating GPIOs, but not on algorithmic code which makes up the vast majority of any application over a few KB in size. 64 bit RISC-V code density is far better than 64 bit ARM code density, which is similar to AMD64 (i.e. quite a bit bigger than i386) Other than a few extra instructions to zero-extend 32 bit values to 64 bits at times, 64 bit RISC-V and 32 bit RISC-V code are identical in size. High performance general computing these days means 64 bit, and RISC-V has by far the highest code density of any 64 bit ISA.