SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (44282)12/29/1998 7:33:00 PM
From: Bill Jackson  Read Replies (1) of 1572507
 
Tenchusatsu, Since both risc and cisc are transcribed into these internal op codes then there is no reason why the processor cannot accept mingled risc and cisc instructions as it will sort them out into those op-codes and do the work, like embedded machine code in certain compiled languages. That way the programmers could transition their products to risc and gradually leave the x86 baggage behind, while keeping the ablity to run x86 when legacy programs are encountered. Does this ablity penalize the system? In theory the risc would get a royal road through to execution and the cisc would have the delay of the decoders, thus more risc would bring the Intel P-II back into balance as the slower front ends would do less and thus feed the larger and faster back end and that would become the limiting operational stage, and since Intel has more one would expect that it would go far ahead of AMD on risc instructions. Will the KNI further this end by being risc?

Bill
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News