top | item 45156719

(no title)

smallpipe | 5 months ago

x86 hasn't been CISC in 3 decades anywhere but in the frontend. An architecture doesn't consume power, a design does. I'm all for shitting on intel, but getting the facts right wouldn't hurt.

discuss

order

uncircle|5 months ago

X86 isn’t CISC, sure, but it isn’t a RISC architecture either.

arp242|5 months ago

Do RISC architectures still exist? ARM has gained tons of stuff and isn't really "RISC" any more either.

Maybe RISC-V? It's right there in the name, but I haven't really looked at it. However, there are no RISC-V chips that have anywhere near the performance x86 or ARM has, so it remains to be seen if RISC-V can be competitive with x86 or ARM for these types of things.

RISC is one of those things that sounds nice and elegant in principle, but works out rather less well in practice.

immibis|5 months ago

The traditional CISC and RISC division broke down the moment processors started doing more than one thing at a time.

A RISC architecture was actually one with simple control flow and a CISC architecture was one with complex control flow, usually with microcode. This distinction isn't applicable to CPUs past the year 1996 or so, because it doesn't make sense to speak of a CPU having global control flow.