Here is how I think about it.
In software, a problem can be solved by more than one algorithm. Same result, different path to get there. Hardware works the same way. A single component, even something as simple as an ALU, can be built in more than one way. That difference in how you build it is what “architecture” actually refers to.
Now let’s scale that idea up to an entire CPU, and it splits into two layers: ISA and microarchitecture.
The ISA is the contract. It defines which instructions exist, how each one is encoded in bits, what each one must produce. Nothing about how. Pure spec.
The microarchitecture is the implementation. The actual circuitry. The actual design decisions. It is free to do whatever it wants internally, as long as it honors the contract.
One ISA. Infinite possible microarchitectures.
This is why an x86-64 program runs fine on both an Intel chip and an AMD chip, even though their internals are completely different designs. Both sides honor the same contract, so the compiled binary does not care who is underneath.
And it is why that exact same program will not run on an Apple M-series chip. Not because the chip is worse. Because it speaks a different contract entirely. ARM instead of x86-64. To get in the door, you recompile for ARM.
So when a company announces a “new architecture” at a keynote, they almost always mean a new microarchitecture. Same ISA, new internals. That is deliberate. Touching the ISA itself would break every compiled program that ever ran on that platform.
This is also why the 1980s were miserable for developers. There was no small set of shared ISAs the way there is now. Every machine invented its own rules. Different word sizes, 32-bit, 36-bit, even 72-bit. Different memory models. Different everything.
It was not a microarchitecture problem. There was no shared contract to even target. So software got rewritten machine by machine, not just recompiled.
The ISA and microarchitecture split is a quietly genius abstraction. It is the reason a chipmaker can completely reinvent its internals every year while your ten year old software never notices.
References