Risc is good!

[Taz-Matt]

Hi!

I didn't post for a couple of days, maybe weeks now. I was a little occupied here, visiting family, etc. but the main point is that I got my new computer. A G4 laptop. "Baby is sweet!". Running on OSX (which is based on BSD), gives it the stability and versatility I need to create web applications with databases and run them on it to test them (since Apache and PHP comes with it). Even with her little 933Mhz processor, it enables me to play Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 4. And best of all, I don't have to worry about viruses or spam since it has integrated firewall, anti-spam and there is almost no viruses running around Apple computers so no need for anti-virus.

But don't worry, it won't keep me away from my PC. I don't like Microsoft but I still like PCs in general. RISC and CISC still both have their places.

See the description below!

[az]

RISC or CISC is no argument for the end-user. what matters is the software, and the human interface hardware.

AZ

[Jammrock]

Most CPU's are CRISC these days anyway. Which is exactly what the name implies, a combination of CISC and RISC. Where RISC works faster they use RISC, where CISC works faster they use CISC.

At least for desktop PC's. WIth the exception of Transmetta which uses VLISC (Very Long Instruction Set Code/computer ... whatever).

Jammrock

[SpiralDragon]

talking bout microsoft... the inq where musing the other day bout MS buying AMD...... speculation is that since MS will be designing thier own CPU for the X-Box they might as well buy AMD..... the other intresting rumor is that intel might be writing its own OS.... now that should be intresting if it ever hapens........

[Wombat]

Originally posted by Jammrock
Most CPU's are CRISC these days anyway. Which is exactly what the name implies, a combination of CISC and RISC.

No, actually, most all processors are RISC these days. Even "x86" processors, they're just decoding the x86 into something more managable for the first three pipeline stages or so.

[Jammrock]

For AMD, yes. Intel's Pentium line is CRISC, and since that's most of the market...

Jammrock

[Kooldino]

Originally posted by Wombat
No, actually, most all processors are RISC these days. Even "x86" processors, they're just decoding the x86 into something more managable for the first three pipeline stages or so.

Yup. Look at the CPU diagrams of anything post-486. They're externally CISC, and they translate them into the internal RISC instruction set that the CPU uses.

[Wombat]

Originally posted by Jammrock
For AMD, yes. Intel's Pentium line is CRISC, and since that's most of the market...

Jammrock

No, it's not. The original Pentium was a big change from the 486, and anything PII or later is pretty RISC inside. Then there's IA-64 too, which is VLIW RISC.

[Marshmallowman]

Thats why pentiums are microcode updatedable, they can update the risc translator(is that correct?).

[Wombat]

I'm not sure what can and can't be done. I know they use the uc to work around bugs and change some timings, but I don't know what its limits are.

[Taz-Matt]

Wow!

I started a thread to know the general opinion on RISC and CISC and it seems there's a lot of things I've got to learn on processors and the different architectures that I've missed in the last years (the years that I was studying hard at college and not cared much about new hardware and technologies)... Thanks to you all, I've found the motivation to gather this information.

And for sure, my new RISC based computer will help me achieve this task!

[Technoid]

Originally posted by Jammrock
For AMD, yes. Intel's Pentium line is CRISC, and since that's most of the market...

Jammrock

First time I read that I saw "CRAPP" instead of "CRISC"