> “Intrinsically linked” doesn’t mean anything, if you want to make an argument then make it. Yes it does, it's refuting your idea that IPC can be considered w

> “Intrinsically linked” doesn’t mean anything, if you want to make an argument then make it. Yes it does, it's refuting your idea that IPC can be considered without looking at cycle time. And you're trying to make an argument that does not address the question I asked. As I told you in my first reply. > Ah, so you are conflating “the amount of transistors spent on x86 decoding” with “the architectural impact that x86 has on performance”. No. Read the conversation from the start, and read the links with comments from people who have actually worked on Apple, AMD, and Intel cores.