Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!amdcad!crackle!tim
From: tim@crackle.amd.com (Tim Olson)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: 80486 vs. 68040 code size [really: how many regs]
Message-ID: <25651@amdcad.AMD.COM>
Date: 16 May 89 16:27:23 GMT
References: <950@aber-cs.UUCP>
Sender: news@amdcad.AMD.COM
Reply-To: tim@amd.com (Tim Olson)
Distribution: eunet,world
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 16
Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:

In article <950@aber-cs.UUCP> pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) writes:
| there is the little matter of a few FACTs, called CRISP, NOVIX and
| TRANSPUTER, that seem to be always forgotten (not to mention the 32532,
| which has the extremely embarassing property of being a simple, well
| designed, reg-mem CISC that outruns most RISCs around...) by reg-reg
| and otherwise RISC designs.

You speak of FACTS, then spout FALSEHOODS.  Rather than guessing, why
don't you really study the performance of the processors you mention as
compared to current RISC processors.



	-- Tim Olson
	Advanced Micro Devices
	(tim@amd.com)