Comments on: Intel’s “Atom” is unlike Acorn’s “Atom” http://volesoft.com/2008/03/04/intels-atom-is-unlike-acorns-atom/ Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:28:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: D http://volesoft.com/2008/03/04/intels-atom-is-unlike-acorns-atom/#comment-1512 Thu, 17 Jul 2008 12:16:56 +0000 http://madmikemagee.wordpress.com/?p=9#comment-1512 The blogger said ‘RISCy’ not RISC.

Incidently, the designers of the 6502 utilized a simple instruction set. The resulting space saved on the die was used as an instruction cache.

Sophie Wilson has stated that the 6502 was very fast for its day even when compared with 16 bit chips. Presumably the cache & the chip’s relative simplicity were a major factor in that.

It all sounds a bit ‘RISCy’ to me.

]]> By: GK http://volesoft.com/2008/03/04/intels-atom-is-unlike-acorns-atom/#comment-10 Fri, 07 Mar 2008 15:54:28 +0000 http://madmikemagee.wordpress.com/?p=9#comment-10 Hello,
& for the record: both the Acorn Atom and Acorn BBC (my very first computer :-) ) made use of the 6502 processor. It was the Acorn Archimedes that was built on the Acorn Risc machine (yes, that’s ARM) and ran under RISCos – the worlds first RISC homecomputer! Later, Acorn sold the ARM technology that ultimately wound up in the hands of Intel (though in a much evolved version).
Kind regards, GK

]]> By: Kenny http://volesoft.com/2008/03/04/intels-atom-is-unlike-acorns-atom/#comment-8 Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:14:55 +0000 http://madmikemagee.wordpress.com/?p=9#comment-8 BBC Micro, RISCy? Naw, it was a bog-standard 6502. Things didn’t get RISCy for Acorn until the A310 with it’s stellar ARM2.

]]>