Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ubvax!ames!lamaster
From: lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: RISC v. CISC (was The NeXT problem)
Message-ID: <17208@ames.arc.nasa.gov>
Date: 27 Oct 88 21:11:01 GMT
References: <156@gloom.UUCP> <310@lynx.zyx.SE> <332@pvab.UUCP> <15964@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <23367@amdcad.AMD.COM> <16003@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov.UUCP (Hugh LaMaster)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.
Lines: 18

In article <16003@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> matloff@iris.ucdavis.edu (Norm Matloff) writes:

>But the point is, and you seem to agree, that the often-voiced (and
>recently brought up in comp.arch) claim that context switches would
>make multiple-window-register-file-based RISC's unsuitable for
>timeshare applications is just simply not borne out by the data.

Correct.  Register windows seem to be a bad idea, but not because of
increased context switch time.  Rather, they seem to be marginally
less productive of performance gain than other uses of equivalent
silicon/gates/etc.


-- 
  Hugh LaMaster, m/s 233-9,  UUCP ames!lamaster
  NASA Ames Research Center  ARPA lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov
  Moffett Field, CA 94035     
  Phone:  (415)694-6117