CISC vs RISC concepts -- from an assembly view
- From: "HellsRaison" <spamtrap@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 24 Apr 2006 19:49:26 -0700
Now this question just popped out of my head. I'm viewing this as a C
program to an x86 assembly output.
CISC CPU speed is relied on microprocessor optimizations (like 3DNow!
and MMX, SSE2, SSE3 extensions/optimizations) which are enabled by the
compiler.
And RISC CPUs rely their speed on _compiler_ optimizations (converting
the least amount of operations done with what the user is trying
accomplish.
So if this is true, shouldn't everyone be using RISC processors and
just use really smart compilers to create their executable. Because
that way the RISC can go extremely fast (1:1 ratio of CPU Cycles :
Operations -- or at least close to this), and all of the advanced math
stuff (that Intel uses -- SSE2, SSE3) would be embedded within the
executable output.
Am I thinking clearly and realistically?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: CISC vs RISC concepts -- from an assembly view
- From: spamtrap
- Re: CISC vs RISC concepts -- from an assembly view
- From: Jeffrey Schwab
- Re: CISC vs RISC concepts -- from an assembly view
- From: Jerry Coffin
- Re: CISC vs RISC concepts -- from an assembly view
- From: TS
- Re: CISC vs RISC concepts -- from an assembly view
- From: toby
- Re: CISC vs RISC concepts -- from an assembly view
- From: Tim Roberts
- Re: CISC vs RISC concepts -- from an assembly view
- From: Robert Redelmeier
- Re: [Clax86list] CISC vs RISC concepts -- from an assembly view
- From: Charles A. Crayne
- Re: CISC vs RISC concepts -- from an assembly view
- Prev by Date: Variables on x86 Cache (L1 or L2) rather than Registers?
- Next by Date: Re: [Clax86list] Syscall interface
- Previous by thread: Variables on x86 Cache (L1 or L2) rather than Registers?
- Next by thread: Re: [Clax86list] CISC vs RISC concepts -- from an assembly view
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
