Re: TI-H: heh


[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: TI-H: heh




>What the fuck are you trying to say? Do you know what the words "complex"
>and "reduced" mean? Do you know why it is a lot easier for mac people to
>make cisc based software run on a RISC processor? The commands are reduced,
>yes you've got it. If I want the CISC to do one thing, then I send one
>command. If I want the RISC to do one thing then I send two commands.
>Otherwise there would be a ton of Mac emulation shit out there, and so far
>everything I've seen doesn't work too well. Pretty much everyone I know
>favours CISC over RISC when it comes to a PC, including computer engineers
>from some good schools. For some odd reason it seems like the Electrical
>Engineer type (you) always want RISC to be their main computer. Are you
>saying we should burn every CISC processor in existance and have RISC
>dictatorship where Motorola leads the way?

Okay here is an example.  RISC processors these days have 32 general
purpose registers...

RISC (add 'proc' to 'temp')

add	temp, proc

CISC

lda	temp
adda	proc
ld	temp


Realy...  RISC code is longer...

What it means is that the instruction set is reduced.  Just because its
reduced, doesn't mean it will take longer.

You don't send commands to your CISC processor like "Make me toast" or
"Open window".  A medium window would take about 1,550,000 instruction
cycles to open.  Considering thats about 1/100th of a second, you don't
notice it (on a ~100MHz computer).

RISC and CISC do different things different ways.  I bet you didn't know
AMD has planted some RISC instructions in your CISC chip to prepare for the
future...

RISC to CISC is misleading.  PPC to Intel is NOT.

Alpha is cisc.  Beats the PPC.  Intel is CISC.  PPC beats Intel.

You have to look at it processor to processor.  Intel simply made some bad
choices, and now those choices are the standards.

Yes, we will end up trashing RISC and CISC.  16 state logic is comming up
in the next 3-5 years.  Imagine a chip on your wristwatch that is more
powerful than a 512 processor CRAY.  Its possible with 16state processors.
We deal with 2 state today, and barely 3.

Its either Cyrix or AMD, but one of those guys impliminted the intel
instruction set in a risc fassion.  Thats why their 166MHz computer runs at
190MIPS, MUCH faster than intel, and runs the same software.

Its just like a PPC 750 clocked at 300MHz but running at 597.1MIPS.

I think you'd be suprized to see a Sun.  You and everyone you know prefers
CISC because its cheep ($90 for a 300MHz processor, $1,300 for computer).
But people in the RISC market get what they pay for.  ($700 for 300MHz
processor, $6,000 for computer).

And if you realy want a good Sun, you would have to get a Sparq.  I think
they start at $25,000 or so.  But again, it will eat pents and PPCs for
lunch.

Actually there are about 3 Mac emulation programs for the PC and they run
great.  A 50MHz PC can emulate a 25-30MHz Mac (depends on what elese you
are doing).  I've ran the mac benchmark tests to proove it.

(btw, there are 2 pc emulation programs for mac.  :\ )

Grant


References: