What, in general terms, is the distinction between computer organization and computer architecture?
Answers
Answered by
2
The distinction between "computer architecture" and "computer organization" has become very fuzzy, if not completely confused or unusable.
Once upon a time, there was a distinction:
Computer architecture was essentially a contract with software stating unambiguously what the hardware does. The architecture was essentially a set of statements of the form "If you execute this instruction (or get an interrupt, etc.), then that is what happens." <More sophisticated readers: I get to the term "ISA" later.>
Computer organization, then, was a usually high-level description of the logic, memory, etc., used to implement that contract: These registers, those data paths, this connection to memory, etc.
Programs written to run on a particular computer architecture should always run correctly on that architecture no matter what computer organization (implementation) is used.
Once upon a time, there was a distinction:
Computer architecture was essentially a contract with software stating unambiguously what the hardware does. The architecture was essentially a set of statements of the form "If you execute this instruction (or get an interrupt, etc.), then that is what happens." <More sophisticated readers: I get to the term "ISA" later.>
Computer organization, then, was a usually high-level description of the logic, memory, etc., used to implement that contract: These registers, those data paths, this connection to memory, etc.
Programs written to run on a particular computer architecture should always run correctly on that architecture no matter what computer organization (implementation) is used.
Similar questions