Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!pcrat!rick From: rick@pcrat.UUCP (Rick Richardson) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: RISC vs CISC on Low-End Processors Message-ID: <502@pcrat.UUCP> Date: 11 May 88 03:19:54 GMT References: <1521@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <1532@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <476@pcrat.UUCP> <833@imagine.PAWL.RPI.EDU> <3444@omepd> <492@pcrat.UUCP> <9561@sol.A Reply-To: rick@pcrat.UUCP (Rick Richardson) Organization: PC Research, Inc., Tinton Falls, NJ Lines: 21 Keywords: RISC, real-time In article <9561@sol.ARPA> crowl@cs.rochester.edu (Lawrence Crowl) writes: > ... >These points taken together seem to indicate that we want neither RISC nor >CISC, but the appropriate compromise. The CRISP processor appears to have >addressed this compromise well. I do not know enough about the architecture >to say whether or not it meets the requirements, but it appears much closer >than many other architectures. The last time we talked to the CRISP people, the processor price was an order of magnitude too high, and there was a definite lean in their attitude towards the high end. Granted, this was before MIPSCo and SPARC, and they may have come back to earth once they saw the competition. -- Rick Richardson, President, PC Research, Inc. (201) 542-3734 (voice, nights) OR (201) 834-1378 (voice, days) uunet!pcrat!rick (UUCP) rick%pcrat.uucp@uunet.uu.net (INTERNET)