Microkernels are better
Posted Feb 27, 2013 20:34 UTC (Wed) by khim
In reply to: Microkernels are better
Parent article: MINIX 3.2.1 released
Intel won the war because they were the processor architecture used in the ibm pc.
Nope. Intel got money for the war because it built the architecture used in the ibm pc, that's true. But it won the war because it was faster. Do you think developers of monsters in top500 list care about ibm pc compatibility? Nope: they care about performance. And this list was dominated by x86 CPUs for years.
If you want to talk about what was faster, the DEC Alpha was faster then the Pentium.
For tasks with floating point — may be at first, but for tasks which only use integers it was actually slower. And when you compare Alpha 21364 with Pentium 4 HT 3.06… it was no longer faster even for floating point.
You could build a computer with a cheap risc cpu and a dsp that would have much better mips per dollar/pound/franc then something with an intel processor.
Then why people are not doing it? Take a look on the list once more: 75% Intel x86-64, 12% AMD x86-64, 12% IBM POWER, and 1% SPARC. Where are these risc cpus and dsps? Why there are so few of them in the list?
to post comments)