3 ms·
> RISC-V is faster.. I find it funny that you make the same pitfall than the author did. Faster on which CPU? The author doesn't measure on any CPU, so here
by volta83 5y ago
> RISC-V is faster..
I find it funny that you make the same pitfall than the author did.
Faster on which CPU?
The author doesn't measure on any CPU, so here there are dozens of people hypothesizing whether fusion happens or not, and what the impact is.
- brutal_chaos_ 5y ago> Faster on which CPU? Perhaps faster means fewer instructions in this instance? Considering number of instructions is what has been discussed.
- volta83 5y agoRight, but all architectures can handle many combinations of instructions in 1 cycle, so this is not really a great proxy for that. Same for code size. If the instructions are half the size, having 1.5x more instructions still means smaller binaries.
- jhallenworld 5y agoAll other things equal, you would prefer smaller code for better cache use.
- volta83 5y ago8x 2 byte instructions (16 bytes) lead to smaller code than 4x 8 byte instructions (32 bytes). Counting number of instructions isn't really a good metric for that either.