Linked by Nicholas Blachford on Wed 9th Jul 2003 16:43 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y This article started life when I was asked to write a comparison of x86 and PowerPC CPUs for work. We produce PowerPC based systems and are often asked why we use PowerPC CPUs instead of x86 so a comparison is rather useful. While I have had an interest in CPUs for quite some time but I have never explored this issue in any detail so writing the document proved an interesting exercise. I thought my conclusions would be of interest to OSNews readers so I've done more research and written this new, rather more detailed article. This article is concerned with the technical differences between the families not the market differences.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
"RISC vendors will always be able to make a faster, smaller CPUs"
by J. Rollins on Thu 10th Jul 2003 02:27 UTC

Interesting read, but there are a few oddball statements in it, like "RISC vendors will always be able to make a faster, smaller CPUs". Huh?

We are dumping our Sun workstations left and right (Blade 2000s, no less) and replacing them with MUCH faster x86 Linux boxes at 1/3 the price. I don't simply mean faster clocks, I mean better performance. Simulation runs that take days on Blades run in LESS than a day on one of our 2.8G P4 boxes. Sure, Sun may one day offer a CPU that is faster than a P4 or Opteron, but they will want $10K for it and it will only be 2% faster. As far as I am concerned, Sun is dead, at least as far as 99.99% of the market is concerned. Hope the other RISC vendors can figure out a way to compete with x86, because at this point what they have to offer is both slower and more expensive.