Thespecificnumbersofabovemeasurementsde pendonthebenchmarkschosenandthe compilertechnologyused.Althoughwefeelthat ourmeasurementsarereasonablyindicativeof theusageofthetwoarchitectures,otherprogra msordifferentcompilersmayyieldslightly differentnumbers.Butwebelievewhatwedoh eretoIntel80386andMIPSR2000primarily displaysthemostcommondifferencesbetweent hetwoarchitecturesbehindthem. 4.Discussions 4.1Whowins? RISCprocessorsgainareputationforhighperfo rmance,andourexperimentsabovedoverify thispoint.

However,nowadays,thedifferencebet weenRISCandCISCchipsisgettingsmaller andsmaller.RISCandCISCarchitecturesareb ecomingmoreandmorealike.Manyoftoday's RISCchipssupportjustasmanyinstructionsas yesterday'sCISCchips.ThePowerPC601,for example,supportsmoreinstructionsthanthePen tium.Yetthe601isconsideredaRISCchip, whilethePentiumisdefinitelyCISC.Furthermor etoday'sCISCchipsusemanytechniques formerlyassociatedwithRISCchips.Heremaybe wecansimplysaythatRISCandCISCare growingtoeachotherintheirarchitectureinthe theoreticalpointofview. Inreality,whatcountsishowfastachipcane xecutetheinstructionsitisgivenandhowwelli

t runsexistingsoftware.Today,bothRISCandCI SCmanufacturersaredoingeverythingtogetan edgeonthecompetition.In90's,mostnewgen erationsofprocessorsemployamixedbagof architecturalfeatures,includingmultipleexecution units,pipelining,caches,andfloating-point integration,thusmakesperformancecomparisons almostuselessoutsideofaspecific application. Makingaprocessorsuccessfulismorethanjust havingthefastestchipavailableatanattractive price.Thereisaproblemofensuringqualitysoft waredevelopmenttoolsareavailable.The typicalhighendembeddedproductthesedaysincorporatesc omplexsoftware,yetmostdeal withshrinkingtime-tomarketrequirements.Thisnecessitatesaproducti vesoftware developmentenvironment.ManyofthenewerRI SCprocessorscannotyetofferatools environmentcomparablewithx86offerings.Inan efforttoacceleratetheintroductionof5th generationprocessorsonthedesktop,Intelrapidl yloweredPentiumprices,forcingdownthe priceofthe486.Consequentlyhighperformance 486processors-costingmulti-millionsof dollarstodevelopbecameavailableatveryaggressiveprices.Thi sallhappenedquicklyand

changedthelandscapeoftheRISCvs.CISCba ttlefield. ItseemslikelythatthePowerPC,thei960,and manyotherlow-costRISCprocessorsarenot goingtoeasilygainasignificantperformancead vantageoverfutureimplementationofthex86 architecture.Embeddedproductdesignersarego odatidentifyingwherethebestvalueis.When chooseaprocessorforembeddedrealtimeapplication,RISCgenerallydon'thaveadva ntages overCISC,sincemostofrealtimesystemsrequireveryfastinterrupthandling andhighcode density.Inanembeddedsystem,duetothesiz elimitationofchips,itisunlikelytohavelarge memory,sohighcodedensityisimportant.Also, CISCchipssuchasMotorola's68Kfamily providebettersoftwareavailabilityforsuchsyste m.[5] ThedebatebetweenRISCandCISCwilllikelyc ontinue,evenifthebattlelinesarenow becomingfuzzy.Thisseemsclear,nomatterwh atyourRISCorCISCpersuasion[1]. Butthe futuremightnotbringvictorytooneofthem,bu tmakesbothextinct.So,whowins?Noone wins. Finally,wewanttopointoutthatthebiggestthr eatforCISCandRISCmightnotbeeachother , butanewtechnologycalledEPIC.EPICstands

forExplicitlyParallelInstructionComputing. LikethewordparallelalreadysaysEPICcando manyinstructionexecutionsinparalleltoone another. EPICisacreatedbyIntelandisinawayac ombinationofbothCISCandRISC.Thiswillin theoryallowtheprocessingofWindowsbasedaswellasUNIXbasedapplicationsbythesame CPU. IntelisworkingonitundercodenameMerced.Microsoftisalreadydevelopingthe irWin64 standardforit.Likethenamesays,Mercedwill bea64-bitchip. IfIntel'sEPICarchitectureissuccessful,itmight bethebiggestthreadforRISC.AllofthebigC PUmanufacturesbutSunandMotorolaarenow sellingx86basedproducts,andsomearejustwaitingforMe rcedtocomeout(HP,SGI).Becauseofthex8 6marketitisnotlikelythatCISCwilldiesoon, butRISCmay. SothefuturemightbringEPICprocessorsand moreCISCprocessors,whiletheRISC processorsarebecomingextinct. Andfinally, EPICmightmakefirstRISCobsoleteandlater CISCtoo. 4.2Summary Fromourlimitedexperiencebasedontheresults ofourbenchmarks,itappearsthattheoretically

thepureRISCmachinesuchasMIPSR2000is amorepromisingstyleofcomputerdesign comparedtoIntel80386CISCChipatthatera. Withtimefleeting,however,thebottomline betweenCISCandRISCbecomesblur,inreal world,peopleonlycareabouthowwellasyste m canservethem,howfastachipcanexecuteth einstructionsitisgivenandhowwellitruns existingsoftware.Wethinktheadoptionofeach otherstechnologytoovercomeitsown drawbacksmaybemoreandmoreatrendinfut ureCPUdesign.Also,otherarchitectures differentfromCISCandRISCmayappear. Acknowledgements Wewouldliketoexpressoursinceregratitudet oDr.EthanL.Millerforhisexcellentteaching, timelyhelpandsupport,andenlighteningdiscuss ion.

References [1]DanielMann,"Whythex86CISCbeatRISC" ,from

http://www.amdembedded.com/Benchmarks/whyx86.htm [2]KeithDiefendorff,"HistoryofthePowerPCar chitecture",Commun.ACM37,6(Jun.1994), Pages28-33 [3]Radin,G."The801Minicomputer",In ProceedingsoftheSymposiumonArchitectural SupportforProgrammingLanguagesandOperati ngSystems(March1982),pp.39-47 [4]Patterson,D.S.andDitzel,D.R."Thecasefo rthereducedinstructionsetcomputer", ComputerArchitectureNews8:6(Oct.15,1980), pp.25-33. [5]DennisTerry,"ChoosingaProcessorforEmb eddedReal-TimeApplications",from http://www.zytec.com/cp/html/choosingproc.html [6]DavidA.Patterson,ReducedInstructionSet Computers,Commun.ACM28,1(Jan.1985), Pages8-21 [7]JeffProsise,RISCvs.CISC:TheRealStory --WhatmakesthePowerPCaRISCprocessor andthePentiumaCISC?,from http://www.zdnet.com/pcmag/pctech/content/14/18/tu 1418.001.html [8]MargaritaEsponda,Ra'ulRojas,TheRISC Concept-ASurveyofImplementations,from http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/lehre/WS94/RA/RISC9.html [9]DavidA.Patterson,CarloH.Sequin,RISCI :AReducedInstructionSetVLSIComputer,25 yearsoftheinternationalsymposiaonComputer

architecture(selectedpapers),June27July2,1998,BarcelonaSpain,Pages216-230 [10]ThomasR.Gross,JohnL.Hennessy,Steve nA.Przybylski,ChristopherRowen, MeasurementandevaluationoftheMIPSarchite ctureandprocessor,Volume6,Issue3 (1988),Pages229-257