3 ms·
Addition was not the bottle neck for the 386. It had a FO4 delay of 80+ per clock. An adder is much faster. Maybe you meant that it was (one, just one!, of m
by peterfirefly 3y ago
Addition was not the bottle neck for the 386. It had a FO4 delay of 80+ per clock. An adder is much faster.
Maybe you meant that it was (one, just one!, of many of) the bottle neck(s) in an optimized implementation?
- thesz 3y ago> Addition was not the bottle neck for the 386. It is a bottleneck for MIPS, SPARC, Alpha and not for 386. How so?
- peterfirefly 3y agoThe 386 wastes so many FO4 gate delays on other things. I thought I made that extremely clear?
- thesz 3y agoCan you elaborate on where the delays came from?