Ungo (a.delete@this.b.c.d.e) on August 12, 2014 4:37 pm wrote:
> juanrga (nospam.delete@this.juanrga.com) on August 11, 2014 7:48 pm wrote:
> > Yes, he mentioned that the ARM64 ISA is more high performance than x86-64 because of three-operand,
> > larger number of registers, and other stuff. He also mentioned the intrinsic efficiency of the
> > ARM ISA, which allows the engineer to spend more transistors to get performance (whereas in x86
> > those transistor have to deal with legacy stuff and inefficiencies of the x86 ISA) and finally
> > he mentioned that his new ARM core will have a bigger engine that the sister x86 core.
>
> These arguments are identical to early 1990s marketing claims promoting the
> idea that PowerPC was fated to crush x86. And I really do mean identical,
> I've seen all of them before. Actually believed them, 20 years ago.
>

Arguments as yours were answered before. I already explained in another post why x86 replaced the old RISC guys: MIPS, power, alpha...