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)