home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: swidir.switch.ch!epflnews!not-for-mail
- From: "Stefan Monnier" <stefan.monnier@lia.di.epfl.ch>
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.programming,comp.arch
- Subject: Re: Why are 32 bit better than 16 bit pgms?
- Date: 8 Feb 1996 20:58:00 GMT
- Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne
- Message-ID: <4fdo4o$82f@info.epfl.ch>
- References: <4er4m4$78q@news1.ucsd.edu> <1996Feb6.135808.12257@friend.kastle.com> <4f9e3p$alp@murrow.corp.sgi.com> <1996Feb8.181534.4170@friend.kastle.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: liasg9.epfl.ch
- Originator: monnier@lia.di.epfl.ch (Stefan Monnier)
-
- In article <1996Feb8.181534.4170@friend.kastle.com>,
- Richard Krehbiel <rich@kastle.com> wrote:
- ] >1) This term has had a long and consistent history of use, with only
- ] >occasional excursions into marketing aberration (i.e., like calling
- ] >the i860 a 64-bit processor).
- ] Since there are "occasional excursions" by marketers, I believe it's
- ] not all that well defined.
-
- In absolute terms, it's probably not very well defined (but then, what is)
- but we're not talking marketing here, we're talking computer architecture.
- If we were talking ISA implementation, it might mean something else, but for
- computer architecture, the 68008 is a 32bits processor, just like the Pentium
- Pro.
- It's kind of like "RISC": you can have it mean whatever you want, but when
- computer architects talk about "RISC", they know very well what it means.
-
-
- Stefan
-