risc processors are truly, truly painful to program in assembly language, so much so that people usually write a minimum c compiler and use that to build all the other software, but risc is generally considered to be faster even for complex applications. cisc doesn't make programs run faster, but it does make assembly language programing much easier. one thing about most risc machines is you can do more operations at the same time per line of finished code, assuming you've got a smart compiler. for instance, on a risc machine you can do a floating point operation, an integer operation, and several other operations during the same clock cycle if different cpu resources are involved, and on systems with multiple "pipe lines" you can over lap things even more although some cisc chips also have multiple pipelines it's still not as efficient for reducing the number of cycles used.
and to be fair, you can't really compare applications running under the macos directly to similar apps running on a pc under windows. in any case that doesn't mean that risc chips at the same clock rate a cisc chips don't get more done, if the code is optimized properly during compilation. the x86 stuff is not just about dos, the fact is even the newest pentiums will run x86 code, and the x86 architecture was kind of damaged to start with, attempts to enhance the processors have been greatly hindered by the need for backward compatibility and the architecture conflicts that are inherent in maintaining the backwards compatibility. there are also several things about the system architecture of current macs that are less than ideal, apple needs to fix these design flaws in their logic boards. for instance, macs still don't properly use ddr ram, don't interleave ram (which can make a huge difference), and don't have as much cache as they should. most if not all of the really, really high end workstations used for electronics cad and simulation of mechanical systems and mechanical cad use risc chips, because they are faster than cisc at a given clock speed if properly used. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ------- > Frankly, speaking only from experience, I don't find the RISC Macs any faster > than the Intel PC's. In fact, some of the more complex programs benefit in > speed from CISC. As for the x86 pattern, I doubt that much remains of the DOS > version these days in Pentium processors. My cousin, who worked for years at > IBM has a low opinion of RISC technology. He says it's more difficult to > write for RISC; and he hated it. ------------ > > Using a Macintosh? Get free email and more at Applelinks! > <http://www.applelinks.com> -- "Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing." - Helen Keller, American Blind/Deaf Author & Lecturer... -- G-List is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/> and... Small Dog Electronics http://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- We have Apple Refurbished Monitors in stock! | & CDRWs on Sale! | Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html> G-List list info: <http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml> Send list messages to: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For digest mode, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subscription questions: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/g-list%40mail.maclaunch.com/> Using a Macintosh? Get free email and more at Applelinks! <http://www.applelinks.com>
