Scumbria,
Alpha was the ultimate example of a simple implementation. The architects focused on clock rate. M1 and K6 are good examples of complex implementations. Those architects focused on achieving performance by minimizing latencies in the pipeline, at the expense of megahertz, die size, power consumption and time to market.
I think you are somehwat selective in the CPU's you picked. PII is as complex, if not more complex than M1, M2 or K6. But at the same time a lot of effort went to process development and optimizing the PII design for the process.
I don't think it was a conscious effort on the part of Intel to come up with a design that does a lot less work per cycle than M1, M2 or K6. They would have loved to have more efficient core. But they came a little short, but the design team was bailed out by other groups within Intel.
The whole Merced effort just reaffirms this. Intel wants their CPUs to do more per cycle. AND they are working on increasing the clock speeds.
Consumers want high megahertz, low power, low cost CPU's
I am not sure. I want high performance, low cost. Megahertz and power consumption (in desktops) don't concern very much. The megahertz, like RPM of a car engine don't concern ME that much. In car engines, I actually like low RPM hum of V8 engines.
Joe |
