Anybody still hate x86 on principal?

[AmigaClassicRule]

x86 isnt going away in the nearest future, but the top is a cold and lonely place, and others are compeeting for the top.

But going for x86 now, would IMHO be a wrong move, especially since ARM is now moving forward, plus PPC is far from gone.

If there were to be a move to an other architecture, such a decision has to be based on extensive research and good foresight.

So personally I think, that sticking to PPC for NG would be a good move, and as for classic, then FPGA would be the right choice.

I don't get this ARM thing. What is it? Is it a new hole CPU like PPC is for 68k and x86? Are you saying ARM is going to take over x86 and ARM is not backward compatible to x86?

I am a little confused here in this whole thing.

[commodorejohn]

I don't get this ARM thing. What is it? Is it a new hole CPU like PPC is for 68k and x86? Are you saying ARM is going to take over x86 and ARM is not backward compatible to x86?

I am a little confused here in this whole thing.

...uh, no. No, ARM is not backwards-compatible with x86, because it's not even part of the same line or based on a remotely similar architecture.

Wikipedia can enlighten you, grasshopper.

[Bif]

I've done a lot of programming on X86 since the early 90s, and have programmed lots of other architectures at low levels since then.

Yeah, when I think back to what X86 was back then ... frightening ... 16-bit programs with segments ... DOS extenders ... X87 stack based FPU programming... limited registers that seem to have different restrictions for each instruction ... indeed ... really it's pure hell when you think about it. 25 years ago I'd bow down and worship 68k and curse X86.

I used to look at 68k way back then with great envy. Dabbled enough to know it was very nice.

Worked on MIPS, PowerPC and lots of custom CPUs since then. Some were very nice with 32 registers that can be used in any way. It made ASM programming a breeze and actually understandable since you didn't have to constantly re-purpose what each of the 4 pathetic X86 registers you have available to you was for as your algorithm went into ASM.

Oddly I didn't have a huge pile of love for the PowerPPC ISA, I found even basic things like calling a function were a tad awkward.

However, when you get into modern computing, I think you would have to be nuts to write anything more than 0.01% of your code in ASM for scalar (non-SIMD) code. Visual Studio C++ for example is an incredible compiler these days, good luck beating it in a meaningful way. Compilers for other platforms are generally not as good, but going away from C++ for scalar stuff is still a bit crazy.

So the only code that typically needs non-standard programming is vector (SIMD) programming, or taking advantage of some other things a compiler can't figure out (branch hints, cache control, etc.). And even here, sane people don't use ASM programming anymore, they use intrinsics to achieve basically the same thing but let the compiler handle all the ugly register allocation.

I'd also say that most CPU's SIMD instruction sets are pretty darn similar to each other these days. These are instruction set extensions that have been added in later years, and I think designers had things figured out enough that they all look pretty similar to each other. And again, modern programming sees these accessed via intrinsics which abstracts the differences even more - no more worry about what registers allow what or what or if the left operand is read or write or whatever.

From my experience X86/64 is also more robust and forgiving than other architectures. More often you can get away with unaligned reads/writes, the memory coherence is more robust, etc. Stuff that you can get away with on X64 may require special programming on other architectures. I haven't really found that to be the case the other way around though.

So now it's X64 I bow down and worship to. I'll take my excellent Visual Studio and easily write and debug some amazingly fast code with little effort and see it run ridiculously fast on my Core i7. What the heck is not to like? It's other new platforms that I have to program that now fill me with a sense of dread.

[agami]

In principle, yes. But only in principle.

A whole bunch of posters go on about "hardware doesn't matter" and stuff, and to a great portion of the public that has always been true. But to a smaller segment of the populous the quality of the engineering matters, you might even know some of them. Heck, you might have even been one yourself. VHS vs. Beta anyone?

It's not because PowerPC is better, and like some other posters have chimed in, most other CPU architectures are better, The Itanium with its EPIC paradigm, the CELL BE, and the latest SPARC T4's and T5's are worth salivating over.

It's the principle, one of my core beliefs; The enemy of the 'very good', is the 'good enough'.

This is why I will always hate x86, even though I use it. No need to point out the irony.

[AmigaClassicRule]

In principle, yes. But only in principle.

A whole bunch of posters go on about "hardware doesn't matter" and stuff, and to a great portion of the public that has always been true. But to a smaller segment of the populous the quality of the engineering matters, you might even know some of them. Heck, you might have even been one yourself. VHS vs. Beta anyone?

It's not because PowerPC is better, and like some other posters have chimed in, most other CPU architectures are better, The Itanium with its EPIC paradigm, the CELL BE, and the latest SPARC T4's and T5's are worth salivating over.

It's the principle, one of my core beliefs; The enemy of the 'very good', is the 'good enough'.

This is why I will always hate x86, even though I use it. No need to point out the irony.

Don't you find it ironic that you hate the x86 but yet you still use it?

[gertsy]

Only seen a few responses here that seem to have grasped the actual question. x86 is a 32 bit processor architecture. Looking at some of the responses you'd think it was a Microsoft product some way linked to Windows and not an Intel one or AMD Copy.
Mac, Linux and some other Unix variants all use this CPU architecture or the newer X64.

The simple purpose of a CPU is to process instructions. As to which CPU is better my measure would be outcome based (The target of architecture). The more arithmetic, logical and I/O outcomes produced per second and the holistic functional result of that would be my measure of a good architecture. For example a super fast processor that requires specialist cooling and is unreliable or unstable couldn't be considered "better" simply because it was faster.

Some of the logic in this thread on what is a better processor looks like a discussion from a Mac forum from 10 years ago. (Sorry Mac users)

[AppleIIGuy]

Only seen a few responses here that seem to have grasped the actual question. x86 is a 32 bit processor architecture. Looking at some of the responses you'd think it was a Microsoft product some way linked to Windows and not an Intel one or AMD Copy.
Mac, Linux and some other Unix variants all use this CPU architecture or the newer X64.

I guess I should have specified when I said X86 I meant Intel.

[Heiroglyph]

To answer the question directly, no I don't hate Intel x86 on principle any more than I dislike Craftsman hammers or Snap-on ratchets.

It's a tool to be used when appropriate, not a sports team to rally behind.

[gertsy]

Agree and the more situations of appropriate use the more useful the tool.

[matthey]

To answer the question directly, no I don't hate Intel x86 on principle any more than I dislike Craftsman hammers or Snap-on ratchets.

It's a tool to be used when appropriate, not a sports team to rally behind.

I'd rather use a better tool. I have an old dependable fine tooth Snap-on ratchet and it blows away every Craftsman ratchet I've ever used. I don't hate Craftsman ratchets but I love Snap-on ratchets. There is even a difference in a hammer. I kept 3 different hammers with different purposes at my wheel rolling station. A big heavy sledge hammer does not in any way replace a lightweight brass hammer. Some hammers have better balance and grip too. The x86 architecture is like a big heavy sledge hammer. It uses brute force to crush everything in site but it's not elegant, it's wasteful and it's overkill for most jobs. x64 is an improvement but I could have a nice processor+memory with the logic used in an i7 caches alone. If you like crappy made in China tools, then I won't stop you. Sometimes they are good too. I do use Craftsman sockets with my Snap-on ratchet because they are good enough especially with a lifetime guarantee.

[Hattig]

I don't get this ARM thing. What is it? Is it a new hole CPU like PPC is for 68k and x86? Are you saying ARM is going to take over x86 and ARM is not backward compatible to x86?

I am a little confused here in this whole thing.

ARM's not new - it's been around since 1985. It was used in the Acorn Archimedes, the Apple Newton, the 3DO console. Since then the architecture has taken over the mobile phone market, the tablet market (iPad, Android tablets, etc), and is encroaching on the netbook and low-end laptop market. Never mind the billions of embedded ARM cores integrated into thousands of different types of chip.

ARM claims that there were around 2.5 billion ARM CPUs shipped in the past quarter alone. That should give you an idea of just how much ARM is used.

And it's cheap, unlike PowerPC chips, and typical application processors integrating ARM also include decent graphics and video acceleration.

What the SoCs often lack is PC features like several SATA ports, PCI Express, etc - but that's not the case with every product.

[psxphill]

It uses brute force to crush everything in site but it's not elegant, it's wasteful and it's overkill for most jobs.

That is why they created the Atom. They've even got some smartphone manufacturers to use it.
 
It'll be interesting seeing how ARM cope with Intel in the long term.
 
ARM don't make anything, all they do is license the design to others for them to build, they have less influence on the pricing. While Intel can afford to not make a return on their investment for a while.
 
If they are as quick or quicker than ARM for the same battery life then they will start eating ARM's lunch.

[SunOS4]

I don't hate x86. Having worked with Sparc, MIPS, PowerPC, ARM, Alpha, and of course M680X0, I do have ones I am fond of (Sparc, M680X0), but I don't go out of my way to avoid x86 wherever possible.

Personally, I think Intel's dominance is coming to an end along with Microsoft's.

[NovaCoder]

I'm not you sure that you can hate a CPU

But anyway, in the context of Amiga's it has be 68k for me.

An overclocked 060 + modern memory + modern RTG graphics could still do an impressive job with more modern software and of course it would also be 99% compatible with the wealth of older software.

[dammy]

I guess I should have specified when I said X86 I meant Intel.

I don't like Intel (I do own an Intel based laptop) on principal, I tend to buy AMD when I can.  My bias against Intel only goes so far, if it's the best deal, I'm going for it.

[Tripitaka]

The most enjoyable moment I've ever had from intel was watching a Pentium Pro overheat and fall through its own motherboard. Priceless (as was the look on my bosses face).

If the next Amiga was Memristor based perhaps we would never see threads like this ever again......
...I can but dream. :/