Stop Microsoft

Miscellaneous => The Lounge => Topic started by: KernelPanic on 28 June 2002, 21:59

Title: RISC vs. CISC >>> Discuss
Post by: KernelPanic on 28 June 2002, 21:59
I think this could be an interesting topic, just lets not start posting crap and decending into a childish arguement...

And if you know it could you put your computers benchmark at the bottom of your post like this:

Processor name -- Speed in Mflops

[ June 28, 2002: Message edited by: * Tux * ]

Title: RISC vs. CISC >>> Discuss
Post by: psyjax on 29 June 2002, 00:57
CPU: G4 SPEED: Dual 800Mhz

This is the best computer I have ever used in my life. It does everything I want quickly, efficiently, with no hassel whatsoever. Demanding Applications run smoothly with out a hitch, I have yet to find something this system can't do.

Sure, you could probably get a dual 2Ghz Athalon XP to run faster, but if that system is running Windoze, I can still kick the shit out of it with OS X  :D

Besides, this comp. does everything I wan't and more, so why should I care.

CPU comparisons are the equivilant of comparing dick size. It's not how fast it is, it's how you use it.
Title: RISC vs. CISC >>> Discuss
Post by: choasforages on 29 June 2002, 01:45
actally i think this was a discussion about different architictures and how they get things done, not the software /*macosx and windows*/

 
quote:

formarly stated by psyjax:

CPU comparisons are the equivilant of comparing dick size. It's not how fast it is, it's how you use it.
 


i don't think so. besides what is wrong with comparing different architures. hell, it might even help someone choose an alternative platform
Title: RISC vs. CISC >>> Discuss
Post by: choasforages on 29 June 2002, 01:51
ok, what i know about cisc is that x86 is a cisc style processor. i think that most modern x86 processor are essaintly risc processors that translate x86 instructions to rops, or risc ops. the x86 also started its life as an 8 bit cpu. they then extended it to 16 bits. after a while they added 32 bit extensions to it. now with amd's x86-64 64 bit extensions are being added to this processor family.

as for megaflops i have heard that the xbox can pull 8 gigaflops. and it is a basicly a celiron

then again i heard that the gamecube can crunch 10 gigaflops.
i wouldn't know about my current k6-III system's megaflops though
Title: RISC vs. CISC >>> Discuss
Post by: psyjax on 29 June 2002, 03:03
quote:
Originally posted by choasforages:
actally i think this was a discussion about different architictures and how they get things done, not the software /*macosx and windows*/

i don't think so. besides what is wrong with comparing different architures. hell, it might even help someone choose an alternative platform


Goes home with tail between legs  :(
Title: RISC vs. CISC >>> Discuss
Post by: the_black_angel on 29 June 2002, 08:07
go to

http://www.apple.com/powermac/specs.html (http://www.apple.com/powermac/specs.html)

to see a comparison between g4(risc) P4(CISC)

also a dual 1Ghz G4 runs at about 15 Gigaflops

I can't find the flops specs for the p4 chip so i can't really do a direct conparison - but ask your selve why doesn't intel have the information on there site easily excessable like apple, maybe because they don't want people to actually compare the two?? this also true for AMD although they do compare against intel they don't compare against apple?

Also choasforages you said that modern X86 processors convert X86 instructions into rops or risc ops wouldn't this slow down the processor because it has to convert the instructions before it can execute them?

Also if the Xbox and gamecube can only do 8 and 10 gigaflops why would you get one the new Nvidia geforce 4 Ti is supossed to be able to do 1.23 trillion operations per second i am lead to beleive that a Gigaflop is 1 billion operations per second, this would mean that the Geforce 4 can do 1.23 TeraFlops????? (1230 Gigaflops) (i could be wrong correct me if i am wrong  (http://tongue.gif)
Title: RISC vs. CISC >>> Discuss
Post by: choasforages on 29 June 2002, 11:49
umm, instructions per second are different than megaflops. megaflops are like floating point arithmatic. like those funny fractions. and translating x86 instructions into riscops is the reason that "fast" x86 processors exist. for more info try www.transmeta.com (http://www.transmeta.com) i don't know if they have any info but they tout the translation as the best part of there chips

[ June 29, 2002: Message edited by: choasforages ]

Title: RISC vs. CISC >>> Discuss
Post by: KernelPanic on 29 June 2002, 18:54
FLOating point OPerationS
Title: RISC vs. CISC >>> Discuss
Post by: KernelPanic on 29 June 2002, 18:57
<This link> (http://cpusite.examedia.nl/docs/cisc_vs_risc.html) explains some of the issues quite simply.