> Full Linux kernel recompile went from 15-20 minutes to less than 5 minutes.

We had a similar jump going from the 486 to the Pentium. I distinctly recall a Linux kernel compile being a 45-60 minute adventure on a 486DX2-66, but only 5 minutes on a Pentium 100. (I felt like a lot of elements of PC architecture improved together around that time as well.)

>45-60 minute adventure on a 486DX2-66, but only 5 minutes on a Pentium 100

Pentium was not that much faster than 486 - 486DX4-133 was faster than Pentium 90. I guess it had more memory

People don't realize how good Intel was (and is!). Take a good look at what the latest gen Xeon or i9 can do (and its SIMD instructions which are like a separate RISC computer inside) and you'll see why they're the leader. It wasn't just strongarming vendors, etc.

One minor quibble. Intel pushed Itaniums hard at on point. The machines were huge and I had to have additional power routed to my office to run it. Thankfully AMD introduced the x64 architecture and the PC industry was saved. Between the power consumption of the Itanium and how hard the IA64 assembly was to debug. I atleast welcomed the X64 architecture.

IA64 assembly was "hard" because it wasn't expected to be something that humans would write or debug routinely - it was basically meant for compilers.

This also describes VLIW architectures more generally, and even more so wrt. current speculative developments like Mill, which AIUI doesn't even have a single, standardized "machine-level" assembly; what the machine runs at its lowest level is only defined by your actual chip configuration. (It is understood that GPU compute works much the same way, with the GPU driver acting as a "compiler" of sorts.)

StrongARM is dead anyway. Take a look at what Threadripper and EPYC can do, especially for the cost - now that's what a real leader looks like.