With more bits, then SUB is going to be more and more expensive to fit in the same number of clocks as XOR. So with an 8-bit CPU like Z80, it probably makes design sense to have XOR and SUB both take one cycle. But if for instance a CPU uses 128-bit registers, then the propagate-and-carry logic for ADD/SUB might take way much longer than XOR that the designers might not try to fit ADD/SUB into the same single clock cycle as XOR, and so might instead do multi-cycle pipelined ADD/SUB.

A real-world CPU example is the Cray-1, where S-Register Scalar Operations (64-bit) take 3 cycles for ADD/SUB but still only 1 cycle for XOR. [1]

[1] https://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/CRAY-1-HardRefMan/CRAY-1-HRM...

The 6502 doesn't support XOR A or SUB A, and in fact doesn't have a SUB opcode at all, only SBC (subtract with carry, requiring an extra opcode to set the carry flag beforehand).

Cortex A8 vsub reads the second source register a cycle earlier than veor, so that can add one cycle latency

Not scalar, but still sub vs xor. Though you’d use vmov immediate for zeroing anyway.

Harvard Mark I? Not sure why people think programming started with Z80.