Talk:Harvard architecture

message: It seems to me like the Microchip Technology mentions are a type of free Advertising. Should they really be a part of this article? Mr. Shoeless (talk) 22:51, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: They don't strike me as advertising - they're just given as examples of Harvard-architecture processors, and even the advantages mentioned are pretty much just "for the niche in which these chips are used, here's some reasons why a Harvard architecture can be an advantage", not "hey, buy these chips, they're good". Guy Harris (talk) 03:28, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ads 

message: Could someone please put at least one sentence of history here, what year was this (was it prior to von Neumann?) and the source (a citation like the von Neumann article has would be ideal.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.38.98.21 (talk • contribs) 14:25, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Quality and Expansions 

message: Is there a relation between the instruction set (RISC and CISC) and the architecture of the processor/microcontroller? I find Harvard architecture processors with RISC instruction set and Von neumann architecture processors with CISC instruction set (I'm not sure if this is always true). Is there a reason relating the architecture to the instruction set?
:No, there is no relationship (e.g., RISC = Harvard / CISC = von Neumann). You can build either of them either way. The PowerPC, SPARC, and ARM are RISC and von Neumann. Seymour Cray's machines were RISC (although the term had not yet been invented when he designed most of them) and von Neumann. I don't believe the Harvard Mark I was RISC as it had some rather complex instructions (e.g., interpolate value from function tape) and it was clearly Harvard.
:The issue gets complex with modern machines that use cache. Both the Pentium and PowerPC are considered to be von Neumann, from the point of view of the programmer, but run internally using instruction and data caches as Harvard. The Pentium is CISC and the PowerPC is RISC. To make it even more complex, current Pentium implementations "translate" the CISC instructions from the instruction cache into RISC like microinstructions, before actually executing them. -- RTC 04:25, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  relation between architecture and instruction set. 

message: This whole article is plagiarised from its primary source.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.40.139.164 (talk) 09:36, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Evidence, please. Tell us where this primary source may be found so we can evaluate your claim. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:46, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plagiarized? 

message: If there are any currently used examples of the Harvard computer architecture, it might be nice to add such a section.
DouglasHeld (talk) 08:11, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: In what way do you find Harvard architecture#Modern uses of the Harvard architecture to be lacking in currently used examples of the Harvard computer architecture? --Guy Macon (talk) 13:16, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contemporary examples? 

message: The claims made in regard to the meaning, origins, and benefits claimed for the so-called 'Harvard architecture' have bothered me for years, from both technical and historical perspectives. Starting 2019 I spent 2 years researching this topic, and then a year getting the resulting paper 'The Myth of the Harvard Architecture' through the peer-review process of the IEEE Annals of the History of Computing (considered the 'journal of record' for computing history) and it has just been published. If you don't have access to that journal you can download a pre-publication version from my own website here: http://metalup.org/harvardarchitecture/The%20Myth%20of%20the%20Harvard%20Architecture.pdf .  Please read it. 
I believe this is the only peer-reviewed research paper on the subject of the 'Harvard architecture' and on that basis alone should be considered a significant resource. 
Frankly, based on the findings from my research (which lists 40+ references), I would like to re-write this whole Wikipedia article, which perpetuates several of the myths I exposed. I would prefer it if others would read my paper and make changes, but if I don't see anyone else taking up the baton I will start to make changes. Rpawson (talk) 15:46, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: The Myth of the Harvard Architecture