Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Byte Addressability And Beyond
Date: Sat, 4 May 2024 21:56:00 +0300
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <20240504215600.00007fcf@yahoo.com>
References: <v0s17o$2okf4$2@dont-email.me>
	<v0s744$l3v$1@gal.iecc.com>
	<v0snlh$30rmc$2@dont-email.me>
	<v0u95n$1oje$1@gal.iecc.com>
	<2024May2.193747@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
	<v11juu$aknp$1@dont-email.me>
	<2024May3.105130@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
	<20240503174020.0000753a@yahoo.com>
	<hlsZN.60731$gF_b.23894@fx17.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 04 May 2024 20:56:05 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1cf2ca68997dbbf185559a65770f6720";
	logging-data="1427252"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+RLnXTywrPG3eehO+LljGMBV31BE2wxok="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:iy8OyVg5TLQ2vEBOTvEgkbYxr3M=
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 4.1.1 (GTK 3.24.34; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
Bytes: 1860

On Sat, 04 May 2024 15:18:37 GMT
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
> 
> Personally I prefer ARM64 architecture over MIPS64 by a considerable
> margin, in almost all respects (and I worked at SGI for a number of
> years in the R10k days).

I also prefer ARM64 over MIPS64.
But nanoMIPS is not MIPS64, it's a new architecture that, at least
according to my measurements, is head and shoulders above any
comppetitors in terms of code densty.
Even MIPSr6 is enough of divirgence from previous releases of MIPS64 to
be considered new architecture, but nanoMIPS is order of magnitude
bigger change than that.