Poll #6

  
  FLTK Apps      FLTK Library      Forums      Links     Login 
 Home  |  Articles & FAQs  |  Bugs & Features  |  Documentation  |  Download  |  Screenshots  ]
 

Show All Polls | Show Comments | Submit Comment ]

Poll #6

Best Processor?
8080/Z80 53 / 6%
MC6809 4 / 0%
MC680x0 49 / 5%
Alpha 136 / 15%
80x86/Pentiums 248 / 29%
SPARC 61 / 7%
PA RISC 13 / 1%
MIPS 127 / 14%
PowerPC 120 / 14%
Other 43 / 5%
854 total votes.

User Comments

Submit Comment ]

From mjr, 13:19 Oct 16, 2003 (score=1)

WOW, an new variant of the "my computer is better than Yours" game ?

Here my vote: the ZUSE Z1 processsor (built with mechanical relais!) is technologically most impressive ;-)

More seriously: what should be the criterion for "best"? Speed? Address range? Memory bandwidth? Efficiency (no of ops pper cpu cycle)? Technical elegance? Market share? Quality of gcc support? Number of bugs in g++ (which is, btw, serious on sparcs)?
Reply ]

From Nishal Thomas, 05:32 Jan 17, 2003 (score=1)

I guess the poll should have been aimed more specifically at x86 series of processors. It would have been more fun to see how many supports were there for Intel and AMD.

But beyond doubt, atleast in the affordable PC processors, PPC would be my best bet!

Ragards, Nishal.
Reply ]

From Anonymous, 05:19 Jan 09, 2003 (score=1)

How is it that x86 is the best when it is one of the worst processors ever designed. In fact, it's not the worst, it is a 80's design that was already old in the 80's. As Microsoft keeps Windows alive, Intel kept ciscs alive (and popular) with x86. As time went on, awful patches where added to solve problems, like having more than 255 instructions. Intel chips are bad, are oldy. The only good thing about it is that they're cheap, but that may be because the popularity and the great amount of money Intel has to invest in making it cheap as well as other things, I wonder what would Sparc do with the same capital for example. The only reason I'm using a Intel is because I can't buy any other thing. Where I used to live, nothing but x86 was known, well, except of PowerPC, but they're too expensive too. I would like to use a Sparc or a PowerPC (I yet don't know how, I haven't read about PowerPCs architecture yet). Thanks.
Reply ]

From Anonymous, 18:13 Jun 17, 2003 (score=5)

never forget that MS designed Windows (well, the NT family, not the now-obsolete DOS family) to support Alpha, x86, MIPS and PPC. Not many other OSes support such a wide variety of chips.

However, the market voted with its wallet, and now we pretty much only have x86. Even Linux is limited in its CPU support, so that's why x86 is best - popularity counts!
Reply ]

From Anonymous, 13:22 Jun 20, 2003 (score=5)

Thats pretty lame, linux supports many many architectures, more than NT.
Reply ]

 
 

Comments are owned by the poster. All other content is copyright 1998-2015 by Bill Spitzak and others. This project is hosted by Seriss Corporation. Please report site problems to 'erco@seriss.com'.