Talk:Berkeley RISC

What were the years in which the seminal research projects were actively producing their published academic results? optikos
 * Excellent point, adding... Maury 13:13, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

RISC article
I don't propose merging the two, but I believe that some parts of Berkeley RISC should move to RISC, and some parts of RISC (particularly in RISC should move to Berkeley RISC. Thoughts? StuartBrady 13:37, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, the section "The RISC concept" is most probably redundant with the article RISC. Somebody would have to put in the work and move such content to the RISC-article, making it better. I do not volunteer. User:ScotXW t@lk 16:24, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

faster and slower
I'm confused.

The article currently claims

"... the RISC I was twice as fast as the VAX, ... Even though the RISC design had run slower than the VAX, it made no difference to the importance of the design."

Which at first glance appears to be a contradiction.

And what exactly was "the importance of the design"? --68.0.124.33 (talk) 20:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

"circuitry that eliminated one line per bit"
The following sentence appears in the article: "The key difference was simpler cache circuitry that eliminated one line per bit (from three to two)"

The meaning of this is not completely obvious to me and would probably not be clear to many others. My guess is that the writer was referring to a single line-width in layout for the the memory cell used for cache. If that impression of mine is correct, the text needs to be altered to specify what is meant by a line or a line-width, and the concept of a memory cell may have to be introduced. I can do the clarification, but I am still not sure I get what's meant by "one line per bit". Can anyone help?Dratman (talk) 19:55, 20 October 2020 (UTC)