Talk:Complex instruction set computer: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Many dubious and unsourced claims: Neither the Patterson/Ditzel "case for RISC" paper nor the 6th edition of H&P define RISC or CISC - the 6th edition of H&P doesn't even mention those terms.
Line 128:
::So that paper could be considered a ''reliable'' source, but not a source very useful for the goal of clearly defining RISC or CISC.
::And the 6th edition of a book John Hennessy co-wrote with another researcher :-) doesn't, as I noted in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Complex_instruction_set_computer&diff=1161013939&oldid=1160988640 this edit], use the terms "RISC" or "CISC", so it may be more of a case of "RISC: tired, load-store architecture: wired" abd "CISC: tired, non-load-store architecture: wired" now. [[User:Guy Harris|Guy Harris]] ([[User talk:Guy Harris|talk]]) 06:36, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
:::Yes, that's the point. RISC and CISC were vague terms in the 1980s and 1990s with multiple contradictory definitions. Since then, advances in computer architectures has made the terms less relevant and the definitions mostly meaningless.
:::As Steve Furber (co-designer of ARM) said in ''VLSI RISC Architecture and Organization'', "A Reduced Instruction Set Computer (RISC) is a member of an ill-defined class of computing machines. The common factor which associates members of the class is that they all have instruction sets which have been optimized more towards implementation efficiency than members of the alternative class of Complex Instruction Set Computers (CISCs), where the optimization is towards the minimization of the semantic gap between the instruction set and one or more high-level languages."
:::On the other hand, Blaau and Brooks say in ''Computer Architecture'', "An architecture in which most, if not all, operations can be implemented in a single datapath action and that has few constructs is called a reduced instruction-set computer (RISC). Early examples are STC ZEBRA, DEC PDP8, and first generation microprocessors such as the Intel 8008 and Motorola 6800."
:::And then you have the extremely quantitative definitions such as Tabak in ''RISC Architecture'':
:::1. Relatively low number of instructions, desirably less than 100
:::2. Low number of addressing modes, desirably 1 or 2
:::3. Low number of instruction formats, desirably 1 or 2, all of the same length
:::4. Single cycle execution of all instructions
:::5. Memory access performed by load/store only;
:::6. Relatively large register set, over 32, most operations register-to-register
:::7. Hardwired control unit (may be microprogrammed as technology develops)
:::8. Effort to support High Level Language operations
:::Thus, one has to accept that RISC and CISC never had nice, clean definitions and describe that with a [[WP:NPOV]] rather than trying to invent the One True Definition.
:::[[User:KenShirriff|KenShirriff]] ([[User talk:KenShirriff|talk]]) 18:03, 24 June 2023 (UTC)