3 ms·

GP seems to think it strange that "x86" would actually not have a performance difference here. I think this might just be due to not realizing just how far bac

• wongarsu 7mo ago
  In a clockless cpu design you'd indeed expect xor to be faster. But in a regular CPU with a clock you either waste a bit of xor performance by making xor and sub both take the same number of ticks, or you speed up the clock enough that the speed difference between xor and sub justifies sub being at least a full tick slower The former just seems way more practical
  • dbdr 7mo ago
    Even if they take the same number of ticks, shouldn't xor fundamentally needing less work also mean it can be performed while drawing less power/heating less, which is just as much an improvement in the long run?
    • MBCook 7mo ago
      That wasn’t much of a concern in the 70s and 80s.
      • phire 6mo ago
        Also, you probably spend much more energy moving the bits around the chip and out to RAM than you do on the actual calculation.