From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 26 Feb 2003 00:20:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 26 Feb 2003 00:20:51 -0500 Received: from quechua.inka.de ([193.197.184.2]:61657 "EHLO mail.inka.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 26 Feb 2003 00:20:50 -0500 From: Bernd Eckenfels To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Minutes from Feb 21 LSE Call In-Reply-To: X-Newsgroups: ka.lists.linux.kernel User-Agent: tin/1.5.14-20020917 ("Chop Suey!") (UNIX) (Linux/2.4.18-xfs (i686)) Message-Id: Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 06:30:50 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In article you wrote: > unfortunantly for them the core CPU speeds became uncoupled from the > memory speeds and skyrocketed up to the point where CISC cores are as fast > or faster then the 'high speed' RISC cores. Hmm.. are there any RISC Cores which run even closely to CISC Speeds? And why not? Is this only the financial power of Intel? Bernd