Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 08:18:10 -0700 From: "Jeremiah Gowdy" <jgowdy@home.com> To: "Vincent Poy" <vince@oahu.WURLDLINK.NET>, "Charles Burns" <burnscharlesn@hotmail.com> Cc: <lplist@closedsrc.org>, <kris@obsecurity.org>, <mwlist@lanfear.com>, <freebsd@sysmach.com>, <questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: the AMD factor in FreeBSD Message-ID: <001f01c0c8e3$f3164bf0$015778d8@sherline.net> References: <Pine.BSF.4.31.0104182008040.4840-100000@oahu.WURLDLINK.NET>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Note that the AMD and Intel chips aren't slower because of incompetence. > > They need to remain backwards-compatible with the 8086 instruction set and > > some of its methods of doing things. The 8086 processor sucks. It's > > architecture and design suck. They were never meant for general purpose > > computing--more for operating dishwashers and the like. The fact that they > > have advanced so far is a testament to the ingenuity of humanity--and to the > > stubbornness. > > Blame IBM. ;-) > > Hehe... I thought the AMD/Intel were both CISC while the PowerPC > is RISC created by IBM/Motorola/Apple. I guess until the 486, the x86 > architecture was no match for workstations. All Intel and AMD x86 cpus today are RISC processors. They implement their own hidden custom RISC architecture internally. The x86 CISC instructions are translated into fixed length RISC instructions before they are processed. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?001f01c0c8e3$f3164bf0$015778d8>