Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!convex!linac!uwm.edu!psuvax1!news From: melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: RISC vs. CISC -- SPECmarks Message-ID: Date: 26 Apr 91 23:10:23 GMT References: <1991Apr22.044553.16805@mp.cs.niu.edu> <1991Apr24.170804.25670@kithrup.COM> <1991Apr24.181932.17810@cs.cornell.edu> <1991Apr26.074427.4703@kithrup.COM> Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet) Organization: Penn State Computer Science Lines: 29 In-Reply-To: Garance_Drosehn@mts.rpi.edu's message of 26 Apr 91 17:56:38 GMT Nntp-Posting-Host: sunws5.sys.cs.psu.edu In article Garance_Drosehn@mts.rpi.edu writes: Could the RISC vs CISC debate be moved into private messages, or some other more appropriate newsgroup? Other than hearing yourselves talk, what good does the debating the matter here do? How is this really next-related? Why isn't it NeXT related? NeXT is going to move to a RISC platform in the future. I know some people that won't even buy a computer unless it contains a RISC chip. RISC has become a marketing tool. Some of us are just trying to understand the full impact of RISC so we don't have to listen to all of the marketing hype like RISC is "good" and CISC is "bad". In other words, we want to understand why RISC, and in particular the one that NeXT is probably going to use(the 88K), is actually better than CISC. We could move it to comp.arch, but this has been a lightweight discussion so far. In fact, how does the 88K compare to the 68040 in performance? If we break up comp.sys.next because of the volume of articles, we should have a separate group for these debates which don't really have a thing to do with the NeXT machine per se... The great thing about computers is that they can eliminate laborious task by automating them. Try putting the thread(the current RISC topic) in your kill file. -Mike