What architecture you are using?

[neme5i5]

It\'s you who doesn\'t understand RISC. You understand the old concept, but not how it\'s done today. (not even sure how much of that you really know well) You also don\'t really understand CISC, and a good example of CISC is Motorola\'s 68040. (you seem to think CISC is only Intel\'s) Just saying it doesn\'t make sense isn\'t an argument.

You don\'t bring evidence to back up your claims, but I do. You should read these:

http://arstechnica.com/cpu/4q99/risc-cisc/rvc-1.html
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/g4vsk7.ars
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/crusoe.ars

BTW, I do give you this. If VLIW is using instructions to schedule execution, then it\'s in hardware as one of the first of my links has said. (written into the compiler) OTOH, if VLIWis packing (not using) instructions together for scheduled execution, then it is indeed software. You have to understand something about piplineing to make any sense of that.

[Leeloo]

Yeah, someone named \"Hannibal\" is an authority when it comes to chip design... If we were talking about killing people, that would make more sense, but even then I don\'t think it\'s the right Hannibal we are talking about. And \"Ars Technica\", the geek tabloid - can\'t you come up with something a little more credible, when discussing with someone who used to read Tanenbaum for fun (Structured Computer Organization, Modern Operating Systems).

And no, I don\'t think that CISC is only Intel, I have never said anything that even hints that way, as I know very well that the 68000 series are CISC. The motorola 88000 series OTOH are RISC. It seems to me that you are not really arguing with me, but with your own delusions. So, continuing the discussion makes no sense for me, you can just post both sides of your discussion yourself - then we can also see what the f*** you are arguing aginst.

[neme5i5]

So the man is wrong b/c you don\'t like his nick name? Hannibal has a non-media (modern), and historical significance. But all Americans seem to know is based on television.

You keep making claims of deep understanding, and learned comprehension. OTOH you can\'t demonstrate it? You resort to an Ad Hominem (go look it up) attack on just one of my sources, yet you think it invalidates everything else? Now just who is delusional?

Have you read even one of them all the way through? Don\'t say you don\'t have time, you read \"Structured Computer Organization, Modern Operating Systems\" for fun. You\'re right, this is a waste of time. I agree with you.

[Leeloo]

Originally posted by neme5i5
So the man is wrong b/c you don\'t like his nick name? Hannibal has a non-media (modern), and historical significance. But all Americans seem to know is based on television.

It has nothing to do with liking his nickname. Nicknames are fine when you\'re a 14 year old playing Counterstrike, but come\'on, could you imagine Tanenbaum having a book published under a nickname like that? Bill Gates? Gordon Moore? Bill Joy? When people know what they are talking about, they tend to put their name on it, and not some CS-nick.

And what does americans have to do with anything? Nothing against attacking them, but I fail to see the relevance.

[Androgos]

I run PS on a 256bit processor and a MIPS/ARM connected to a dualcore PIC

<.<

[Xordan]

Originally posted by Androgos
I run PS on a 256bit processor and a MIPS/ARM connected to a dualcore PIC

<.<

\\o/

[Leeloo]

Originally posted by Androgos
I run PS on a 256bit processor and a MIPS/ARM connected to a dualcore PIC

PIC? Would that be PIC as in PIC16c84?

/me wonders if Androgos is joking or not...

[Androgos]

Originally posted by Leeloo

Originally posted by Androgos
I run PS on a 256bit processor and a MIPS/ARM connected to a dualcore PIC

PIC? Would that be PIC as in PIC16c84?

/me wonders if Androgos is joking or not...

Yes, actually it\'s a PIC16F628 and running it fine.
It\'s a bit low FPS in the plaza though, but allover it\'s fine.

[Kernel]

Don\'t mean to be rude, and I know I\'m not a mod/admin, but maybe you could be a bit more speficic on the architecture type?
Eg:
amd
amd64
x86
x86_64
athlon
athlon64

Etc.

[Xordan]

Originally posted by Kernel
Don\'t mean to be rude, and I know I\'m not a mod/admin, but maybe you could be a bit more speficic on the architecture type?
Eg:
amd
amd64
x86
x86_64
athlon
athlon64

Etc.

Well it\'s not easy to change a poll, and there\'s not much point because I\'m assuming that people who say 32-bit are on x86 or ppc, and people who say 64-bit are on x86_64 or ppc64, so the mainstream arch. I guess there\'s a wider range, like ia64, but that won\'t ever be supported anyway.

[hook]

I think I should change my vote from \"32 bit\" to \"64 bit\" now :]

...I\'ve just got a new Acer Aspire 5022 Laptop (AMD Turion + ATI Radeon)

[aenima]

I play on Intel 32 Bit,

not enough money to buy another station on 64 bit .

[Thetargos]

AMD64 Fedora (custom K8 specific kernel)

[JohnB]

64-bit mostly, now I\'ve eventually managed to build the client on it.

32-bit sometimes.