> The first Google result I found agrees: https://www.bitsnbites.eu/cisc-vs-risc-code-density/ https://www.bitsnbites.eu/cisc-vs-risc-code-density/ This isn't

> The first Google result I found agrees: https://www.bitsnbites.eu/cisc-vs-risc-code-density/ https://www.bitsnbites.eu/cisc-vs-risc-code-density/ This isn't a great metric for 2 reasons. Firstly, it's looking at static rather than dynamic instruction counts, and 2nd x86 tends to get bigger vectorized implimentations, but these are often on bigger vectors so the "instructions per data" which is the more important metric in many cases is lower. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19329128 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19329128 has a pretty interesting discussion on this from a few years ago, but 2 places where x86 shines are the lea and mov instructions. They are both incredibly compact for representing potentially very complicated operations.