Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!oliveb!pyramid!voder!apple!baum
From: baum@apple.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Japanese 32-bit CPUs ( NEC V70 ) [really CISC]
Message-ID: <754@apple.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 11-May-87 20:24:42 EDT
Article-I.D.: apple.754
Posted: Mon May 11 20:24:42 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 14-May-87 04:46:51 EDT
Reply-To: baum@apple.UUCP (Allen Baum)
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Lines: 22

--------
[]
>....  Since RISC programs will tend to be substantially
>larger than CISC programs, a RISC system will need more memory than
>a CISC system.
>
>(Disclaimer:  I, of course, have no evidence to back up this theory.)
>
>-- Chuck

I have evidence in both directions. The IBM801 folks have said that
the 801 code size was about 20% larger than IBM/370 code. This is
probably smaller than the difference between two different compilers.
An I-cache that is 20% smaller will not significantly affect your
performance (.e.g delta will be < 20%).

On the other hand, the ATT CRISP folks claim code size which is equal
to or smaller than VAX code, which is known to be fairly compact. So
much for canard that RISC code is huge.
--

{decwrl,hplabs,ihnp4}!nsc!apple!baum		(408)973-3385