[pritovido]

It is a simple process, everything that you do in a language needs to be mapped into lower level instructions.

If the lower level hardware instruction does not exist, you use multiple of other instructions to emulate that.

If you add a low level instruction that maps a very common high level operation in hardware, you don't need to call 5 to 10 software functions(extremely expensive),each calling lots of opcodes but just can execute a single opcode and works by hardware beings extremely faster.

It is not hard to be better than Microsoft here. From my personal experience and having disassembled lots of their code they always were lazy bastards. They cared 0 about efficiency. Why should they? They had monopolies like Office or Windows giving them over 95% margins. They could just use the money they printed to buy everything instead of competing.

Lisp machines did that (adding opcodes that map the high level language) with the most common Lisp operators. Those machines were extremely expensive, in the hundreds of thousands of dollars because few could afford that. Apple sells in massive scale, in the hundreds of millions of CPUs per year, making this cheap for them.

[lispm]

> each calling lots of opcodes but just can execute a single opcode and works by hardware beings extremely faster.

Typically these language oriented instructions need to be implemented by microcode in the CPU. Often this does not create a fast system, but it helps to keep the compiler simple. Examples are typical Lisp Machines, you've mentioned. With RISC CPUs OTOH the idea is to make the CPU instructions more primitive and put more effort into optimizing compilers instead. There were a few attempts to combine (high) language supporting architecture and the RISC principle, but I personally have never seen such a machine.

> in the hundreds of thousands of dollars

Usually in the 'tens of thousands of dollars'.