1. RISC and CISC

2. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk2 RISC versus CISC The world of microprocessors and CPUs can be divided into two parts: complex instruction set computers using CISC processors, and reduced instruction set computers with RISC processors. Example: Intel’s Pentium-class microprocessors – CISC Sun’s SPARC microprocessors - RISC

3. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk3 Why RISC? –First microprocessors used very simple instruction sets. –As microprocessors became more complex, then more instructions incorporated. (>300 current CISC). –Some instructions used frequently, others are very specialised and used rarely. –In general, the more instructions there are in an instruction set, then the longer the propagation delay in the CPU. (More logic to decode instructions needed). –ANSWER: to speed up CPU, then reduce instruction set. (<100 current RISC). But, there is a problem with this.

4. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk4 The RISC Tradeoff –The eliminated instructions generally correspond to specific statements in higher-level languages. Eliminating these would force the CPU to use several instructions instead of one to perform the same function (if required by the program). This would invariably require more time. –Example: AND, OR, XOR, and NOT Eliminate OR and XOR instructions because they can be constructed from AND and NOT instructions (DeMorgan’s etc. – think what we saw in LC-3). –SUB Can be implemented using addition and 2’s complement

5. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk5 The RISC CPU - features Reduced instruction set size Fixed length instructions Limited instructions for interaction with memory for loading and storing data Fewer addressing modes Instruction pipeline Large number of registers Hardwired control unit

6. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk6 Fixed length instructions In a RISC CPU, every instruction has the same number of bits. Each instruction is capable of being executed in a single clock cycle. You will have seen this with the LC-3 instructions/architecture.

7. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk7 Limited memory interaction instructions All processors can load and store data to and from memory, but CISC includes other capabilities, e.g. ANDing accumulator contents with memory. RISC first loads value into register, then performs AND operation

8. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk8 Fewer addressing modes Some addressing modes require several memory accesses which degrades performance. RISC CPUs allow only a few addressing modes that can be processed quickly

9. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk9 Instruction pipeline –One instruction is executed while the next instruction is being decoded and its operands are being loaded, while the next instruction is being fetched. By overlapping these operations (like assembly pipeline), the CPU executes one instruction per clock cycle

10. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk10 Many registers Having a large number of registers allows the CPU to store many operands internally, rather than in memory. This reduces access time significantly

11. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk11 Hardwired Control Unit A CISC processor uses microprogramming rather than a hard-wired CU Microencoding of machine instructions is easy, and allows for backwards compatibility But hardwired logic has a lower propagation delay, hence RISC CUs run faster, but are not as easy to modify

12. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk12 So, which is better? For RISC: 1.Control units are less complex, and easier to design, so they can run at higher clock frequencies than CISC. They are also smaller, allowing more room for extra registers and other components. Simpler design makes them easier to use in parallel

13. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk13 Which is better? For RISC: 2.Fewer instructions means compilers are less complex than for CISC processors (though will probably need many more machine code instructions); ideal for HLL programming (but CISC is better for Assembly Language programming)

14. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk14 Which is better? For CISC: 1.Maybe more complex to design, but latest chips are often built on previous ones (e.g. Intel Pentium), so development costs might not be higher, and may actually be lower. Also means technology is tried and tested

15. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk15 Which is better? For CISC: 2.Backwards compatibility – can run the same software as previous versions of the processor

16. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk16 Which is better? The jury is still out Some believe RISC will out-compete CISC Others believe they will co-exist Others foresee a hybrid CPU But there are lots of heated debates going on!

17. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk17 Intermingling Intermingling of RISC and CISC concepts is already underway, with CISC processors incorporating pipelining CISC processors are incorporating more registers too, as improved technology allows The PowerPC (now defunct) was an example of a hybrid

18. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk18 The LC-3 is RISC How do you know this from your knowledge of LC-3 assembly language? –Very limited set of commands –Fixed length instructions –Limited addressing modes –Operands cannot be in memory

19. Dec. 2008/Dec. 2011ais@aber.ac.uk and dap@aber.ac.uk19 The 68HC11 is CISC –Full set of commands –Variable length instructions –Addressing modes –Operands can be in memory