I didn't see real CPU progress for over 5 years (except for Mhz and the Centrino).
There was the 486 -> one intruction per clock cycle.
Pentium -> two Integer and two floating point pipelines.
Pentum Pro-2-3-4 -> Three Integer and two floating point piplines. (the K7/K8 has 3 integer and 3 float units I think)
Why don't x86 CPUs have 16 piplines like Nvidia & ATI video cards?? (I beleve they are 10x faster in their own special way)
The duel-core CPUs seems like a lame way to add performance-Like putting two Pentium 4s on one die and add some cache. Double the transistors to gain 30% performance??
If the x86 architecture reached it limit, someone should do the world a favor and put it out of its misery. With the x86 out of the way, make a MODERN CPU in no way compatible with x86 (and without other CPU/Bus problems, perhaps something like the the long instruction Itanium or the Cell??) and make a x86 emulator (the new cpu will be so much faster, the emulator doesn't need to be 100% efficent). I want to see the same approach done to MS-Windows. But that's a different story.
I think something similar was done on the Mac OSX to run OS9-8-7 software. The emulator works well as far as I know. I also don't understand why the G5 isn't much faster that it is. The G5 doesn't have many of the x86 limitations (as Mac lovers tell me).
I don't believe the x86 is the only architecture which is a general purpose CPU. Remember the 64 bit DEC Alpha? That was 10 years ago!
PLEASE correct me if I am badly mistaken. This has been bothering me for a long time.
Thanks!
Erric
erric_usa@hotmail.com
There was the 486 -> one intruction per clock cycle.
Pentium -> two Integer and two floating point pipelines.
Pentum Pro-2-3-4 -> Three Integer and two floating point piplines. (the K7/K8 has 3 integer and 3 float units I think)
Why don't x86 CPUs have 16 piplines like Nvidia & ATI video cards?? (I beleve they are 10x faster in their own special way)
The duel-core CPUs seems like a lame way to add performance-Like putting two Pentium 4s on one die and add some cache. Double the transistors to gain 30% performance??
If the x86 architecture reached it limit, someone should do the world a favor and put it out of its misery. With the x86 out of the way, make a MODERN CPU in no way compatible with x86 (and without other CPU/Bus problems, perhaps something like the the long instruction Itanium or the Cell??) and make a x86 emulator (the new cpu will be so much faster, the emulator doesn't need to be 100% efficent). I want to see the same approach done to MS-Windows. But that's a different story.
I think something similar was done on the Mac OSX to run OS9-8-7 software. The emulator works well as far as I know. I also don't understand why the G5 isn't much faster that it is. The G5 doesn't have many of the x86 limitations (as Mac lovers tell me).
I don't believe the x86 is the only architecture which is a general purpose CPU. Remember the 64 bit DEC Alpha? That was 10 years ago!
PLEASE correct me if I am badly mistaken. This has been bothering me for a long time.
Thanks!
Erric
erric_usa@hotmail.com