Re: TI-H: Power PC
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: TI-H: Power PC
Grant Stockly wrote:
> Just by hearing the name PowerPC, you know its better than any Intel or
> compatible. The PPC uses RISC technology (~4 years old) and the intel
> processors use CISC technology (~22 years old). For one thing, the C
> stands for complicated and the R stands for reduced. If you want, I can
> show you a programming example for each in machine code and you can see
> which can do the same process faster.
Ummm... CISC stands for Complex Instruction Set Computer. Complicated
and Complex have different connotations.
Both CISC and RISC machines have their advantages. Modern Intel
processors
grow more RISC-like every year, and most AMD processors are fully RISC
already. The line between the two is growing very thin, even the Atmel
AVRs have multiply routines and they are RISC. Some ancient CISC
processors don't even have multiply instructions. When you say that
RISC is 4 years old, I am a bit curious as to how you arrived at
that number. The z80, for instance, is technically a CISC processor
but its instruction set is in many ways less useful than the AVR
RISC set.
You should know by now that the computer industry does not always select
the absolute most advanced hardware. Popularity is often determined
by many factors, such as advertizing, existing user base, compatability,
etc. Even so, I question that argument that the RISC PPCs are always
faster and more code efficient than any existing CISC processor. It
simply depends on what you are doing.
Irregardless, the mac OS is a bloated, patronizing and, in my
experience,
very unstable system.
--
Bryan Rittmeyer
mailto:bryanr@flash.net
http://www.flash.net/~bryanr/
Follow-Ups:
References: