←back to thread

366 points pabs3 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.204s | source
Show context
nolist_policy ◴[] No.41366371[source]
> The x86 instruction set is very very big. According to rough statistics, the ARM64 backend implements more than 1,600 x86 instructions in total, while the RV64 backend implements about 1,000 instructions

This is just insane and gets us full-circle to why we want RISC-V.

replies(6): >>41366607 #>>41366813 #>>41367102 #>>41367114 #>>41367130 #>>41368705 #
patmorgan23 ◴[] No.41366607[source]
Not really. RISC-V's benefits are not the "Reduced Instruction Set" part, it's the open ISA part. A small instruction set as actually has several disadvantages. It means you binary bigger because what was a single operation in x86 is now several in RISC-V, meaning more memory bandwidth and cache is taken up by instructions instead of data.

Modern CPUs are actually really good at deciding operations into micro-ops. And the flexibility of being able to implement a complex operation in microcode, or silicon is essential for CPU designers.

Is there a bunch of legacy crap in x86? Yeah. Does getting rid of dramatically increase the performance ceiling? Probably not.

The real benefit of RISC-V is anybody can use it. It's democratizing the ISA. No one has to pay a license to use it, they can just build their CPU design and go.

replies(3): >>41366716 #>>41367237 #>>41374502 #
1. snvzz ◴[] No.41374502[source]
>It means you binary bigger

False premise, as size tool shows RVA20(RV64GC) binaries were already smallest among 64bit architectures.

Code gets smaller still (rather than larger) with newer extensions such as B in RVA22.

As of recently, the same is true in 32bit when comparing rv32 against former best (thumb2). But it was quite close before to begin with.