Why RISC vs. CISC Is the Wrong Way to Compare x86, ARM CPUs When Patterson and Ditzel coined RISC and CISC they intended to clarify two different strategies for CPU design.

But RISC self-contained chips use more streamlined instructions than CISC systems that have various math processors, voltage regulators, and memory controllers scattered across a mainboard.

The result is that RISC moves processing complexity up into the program. CISC does more on-chip; RISC does more in the program. For RISC, it means a larger program and more memory usage.

Prompted by the chipmaker's announcement of the SSE5 instruction-set extensions, Glaskowsky analyzes the ultimate outcome to this old controversy.

And if CISC won, then RISC was a useful idea whose time came and went, and some of its better ideas live on because Intel has adopted them for its x86 family.

I was just wanting to know if anyone can tell me if the new athlon mp and xp's are risc chips or if they went to cisc. I know the older AMD chips were all RISC, but not sure of the newer ones ...

A CISC program will typically use fewer instructions but each instruction will take more cycles. Reduced instruction set computer, or RISC, types have a smaller, optimized set of generalized, simple ...

A new study comparing the Intel X86, the ARM and MIPS CPUs finds that microarchitecture is more important than instruction set architecture, RISC or CISC. If you are one of the few hardware or ...

Try to investigate the differences between the x86 and ARM processor families (or x86 and the Apple M1), and you'll see the acronyms CISC and RISC. It's a common way to frame the discussion, but ...