Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!ukc!acorn!jurquhart
From: jurquhart@acorn.co.uk (James S Urquhart)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Why do RISCs use (*not* need) fewer transistors?
Message-ID: <4506@acorn.co.uk>
Date: 18 Dec 90 08:27:08 GMT
References: <1639@svin02.info.win.tue.nl>
Sender: daemon@acorn.co.uk
Distribution: comp
Organization: Acorn Computers Ltd, Cambridge, England
Lines: 19


In article <1639@svin02.info.win.tue.nl> rcpieter@svin02.info.win.tue.nl (Tiggr) writes:

>hoelzle@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Urs Hoelzle) writes:
>
>>So: why do RISC implementations currently use fewer transistors??
>
>The ARM is a good example of a RISC with very few transistors (core is < .5k
>transistors).  The reason is that its designers wanted it to be CHEAP.
>
>Tiggr


 Although ARM2 (VL86C010) is fairly small it is not as small as stated
above. In fact the ARM2 chip has approximately 25K transistors and ARM3
(VL86C020) has 312K transistors. In ARM3 90% of the transistors make up the
4K-byte Cache and its associated control logic.

Jamie Urquhart (Advanced RISC Machines)