64 bit 6502
Christian Lott
Like, when?
Christian
Rick Balkins
"Christian Lott" <sag...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:qaNDc.6124$mN3.4794@lakeread06...
> Didn't someone say this was in the works?
>
> Like, when?
>
> Christian
Yeah.
Something that WDC is/was doing.
Called 65c064
Now, there is something called "Terbium". Not exactly sure how the
connection is to each other.
Christian Lott
"Rick Balkins" <rickbalki...@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote >
Something that WDC is/was doing.
>
> Called 65c064
Was/is Chuck Peddle associated with this?
Rick Balkins
William D. Mensch
MagerValp
CL> Didn't someone say this was in the works?
Rick has been babbling about it, while everyone else has been ignoring
him. It's a completely useless idea.
--
___ . . . . . + . . o
_|___|_ + . + . + . Per Olofsson, arkadspelare
o-o . . . o + Mage...@cling.gu.se
- + + . http://www.cling.gu.se/~cl3polof/
Christian Lott
> "CL" == Christian Lott <sag...@cox.net> writes:
> CL> Didn't someone say this was in the works?
>
> Rick has been babbling about it, while everyone else has been ignoring
> him. It's a completely useless idea.
That's too bad.
Do you know how many plug in chips the C=One will support?
(At least I thought her board had sockets for other 8bit processors along
with one for a 6502.)
Christian
PS. MV, that 2kTetris version you made for the last minigame competition was
infinetly excellent! I never played tetris so much. I would sit for hours
playing, eating bowls of Mint Chocolate Chip ice cream between games. Thank
you!
My high score was: 745
Jim Brain
>>>>>>"CL" == Christian Lott <sag...@cox.net> writes:
>
>
> CL> Didn't someone say this was in the works?
>
> Rick has been babbling about it, while everyone else has been ignoring
> him. It's a completely useless idea.
>
Egad, I can;t believe I am going to post this, but:
Is it a *completely* useless idea?
Or in other words, the thoughts i have about a 32 bit 6502 variant are
not worth the napkins I am writing them on?
Just asking. I'm not under the delusion that WDC will build such a
beast, and even if they did, I hate the '816 command set.
Jim
--
Jim Brain, Brain Innovations
br...@jbrain.com http://www.jbrain.com
Dabbling in WWW, Embedded Systems, Old CBM computers, and Good Times!
Robert Pagano
>Egad, I can;t believe I am going to post this, but:
>
>Is it a *completely* useless idea?
>
>Or in other words, the thoughts i have about a 32 bit 6502 variant are
>not worth the napkins I am writing them on?
>
Check out...
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/65GZ032/
for Gideon Zweijtzer's project...
Sam Gillett
"Jim Brain" <br...@jbrain.com> wrote ...
> MagerValp wrote:
>
> >>>>>>"CL" == Christian Lott <sag...@cox.net> writes:
> >
> > CL> Didn't someone say this was in the works?
> >
> > Rick has been babbling about it, while everyone else has been ignoring
> > him. It's a completely useless idea.
>
> Egad, I can;t believe I am going to post this, but:
>
> Is it a *completely* useless idea?
Nothing is *completely* useless. Maybe the question should be, could Western
Digital make a profit from a 64 bit processor that can trace it's ancestry to
the 6502?
I am no expert, but feel like such a processor would have much more power
than needed, and be too expensive for the embedded market. Yet, lack enough
power to compete with other entries in the desktop market.
If power consumption were low enough, the palm market? Maybe?
--
Best regards,
Sam Gillett
Change is inevitable,
except from vending machines!
Christian Lott
"Sam Gillett" <samgille...@diespammermsn.com> wrote in
> Nothing is *completely* useless. Maybe the question should be, could
Western
> Digital make a profit from a 64 bit processor that can trace it's ancestry
to
> the 6502?
If the instuction set was nice enough.
>
> I am no expert, but feel like such a processor would have much more power
> than needed,
There's never enough power.
> and be too expensive for the embedded market. Yet, lack enough
> power to compete with other entries in the desktop market.
>
We're thinking expansion card, right?
> If power consumption were low enough, the palm market? Maybe?
>
Please, not another palm pilot.
Cameron Kaiser
>Just asking. I'm not under the delusion that WDC will build such a
>beast, and even if they did, I hate the '816 command set.
I'm relieved to hear someone else say that. I can't stand it either, and
you hear so many people raving about how nice it is that I thought I must
be defective in the head. ^^;;
--
Cameron Kaiser * cka...@floodgap.com * posting with a Commodore 128
personal page: http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/
** Computer Workshops: games, productivity software and more for C64/128! **
** http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/cwi/ **
Sam Gillett
"Christian Lott" <sag...@cox.net> wrote ...
> "Sam Gillett" <samgille...@diespammermsn.com> wrote in
>
>> Nothing is *completely* useless. Maybe the question should be, could
>> Western Digital make a profit from a 64 bit processor that can trace it's
>> ancestry to the 6502?
>
> If the instuction set was nice enough.
See a couple of other comments in this thread about the 65816 instruction
set. :-)
>> I am no expert, but feel like such a processor would have much more power
>> than needed,
>
> There's never enough power.
An 8-bit processor has plenty of power for some embedded applications, for
example, a VCR. The engine control computers found under the hood (bonnet
for the English) of todays automobiles can make do with 16-bit processors.
And, todays 32-bit processors are probably more than powerful enough for
most aviation and robotics applications.
Some military applications for embedded micro-processors might require 64 bit
power. But it seems to me a safe bet that the military already has 64 bit
processors, and that they are not from Western Digital, Intel, or AMD.
>> and be too expensive for the embedded market. Yet, lack enough
>> power to compete with other entries in the desktop market.
>
> We're thinking expansion card, right?
That wasn't really what I was thinking of, but I guess the graphics processor
on a video card could be considered an embedded processor. But, if we do
that, we have to classify the VIC chip in a C64 as an embedded processor
also.
> > If power consumption were low enough, the palm market? Maybe?
>
> Please, not another palm pilot.
How about a palm computer that _really_ flies, and has connectors for a full
keyboard, and monitor. Maybe even from Tulip with a C= logo! Whoops, now
I'm getting as bad as Rick!
Rick Balkins
"Sam Gillett" <samgille...@diespammermsn.com> wrote in message
news:kkrEc.15267$DT5....@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
> See a couple of other comments in this thread about the 65816 instruction
> set. :-)
>
> An 8-bit processor has plenty of power for some embedded applications, for
> example, a VCR. The engine control computers found under the hood (bonnet
> for the English) of todays automobiles can make do with 16-bit processors.
> And, todays 32-bit processors are probably more than powerful enough for
> most aviation and robotics applications.
>
> Some military applications for embedded micro-processors might require 64
bit
> power. But it seems to me a safe bet that the military already has 64 bit
> processors, and that they are not from Western Digital, Intel, or AMD.
>
> That wasn't really what I was thinking of, but I guess the graphics
processor
> on a video card could be considered an embedded processor. But, if we do
> that, we have to classify the VIC chip in a C64 as an embedded processor
> also.
>
> How about a palm computer that _really_ flies, and has connectors for a
full
> keyboard, and monitor. Maybe even from Tulip with a C= logo! Whoops, now
> I'm getting as bad as Rick!
Anyone can be cheap but what happens when you do. I find it interesting
though.
If you want to be the el cheapo componay then you can be the most stripped
down useless piece of cr*p on the market.
Now let's remember that eventually - even for consumer products like what
the VCR market is - is going to be totally replaced by digital media
products which would be powered by 32 Bit technology over the next 10 years.
32 Bit technologies are already replacing the 8 and 16 Bit technology in
such markets.
Rick Balkins
"MagerValp" <Mage...@cling.gu.se> wrote in message
news:p148ye6...@panini.cling.gu.se...
> >>>>> "CL" == Christian Lott <sag...@cox.net> writes:
>
> CL> Didn't someone say this was in the works?
>
> Rick has been babbling about it, while everyone else has been ignoring
> him. It's a completely useless idea.
>
MV - I believe its the Terbium right now.
Christian Lott
"Sam Gillett" <samgille...@diespammermsn.com> wrote in
> I'm getting as bad as Rick!
eInk when it gets color and moving pictures.
I thought there was a C=one essence to all this talk.
The only time I was inspired to learn ML is when I picked up this book
http://apple2history.org/museum/books/assemblylang.html
I love the cover.
Of course this whole community on the net were my greatest inspiration.
Christian
Christian Lott
Would anyone like to propose instruction suggestions?
Then we as a group could sign into the SIG under our company name:
comp.sys.cbm
Christian
"Rick Balkins" <rickbalki...@nospam.wavestarinteractive.com> wrote in
message news:10e4k9i...@corp.supernews.com...
MagerValp
CL> Do you know how many plug in chips the C=One will support?
As many as people decide to make. There's an 8-bit CPU slot and you
can put pretty much anything you want there.
CL> PS. MV, that 2kTetris version you made for the last minigame
CL> competition was infinetly excellent! I never played tetris so
CL> much. I would sit for hours playing, eating bowls of Mint
CL> Chocolate Chip ice cream between games. Thank you!
Glad you enjoy it :)
MagerValp
JB> Is it a *completely* useless idea?
64-bit, yes. It starts to be useful when you need to work with really
large data sets. The odds of you needing to run 6502 code natively on
the same machine that you use for massive databases and scientific
simulations are pritty slim.
JB> Or in other words, the thoughts i have about a 32 bit 6502 variant
JB> are not worth the napkins I am writing them on?
32-bit makes a bit more sense, but not an awful lot really. The extra
logic needed to implement the legacy instructions is probably just
going to make the CPU slower overall. Getting rid of it and running
the 6502 code under emulation is most likely faster. Jeri's switch
from the 65j02 to the JRISC in the C1 core certainly seems to support
it. The 6502's is memory bound and needs an 8-bit bus, which just
didn't work very well in an otherwise 32-bit system and it was
basically limited to 2 MHz. The JRISC has a much simpler design, with
a bunch of generic 32-bit registers, and it runs rings around the
65j02.
Rick Balkins
> http://www.westerndesigncenter.com/wdc/news2.cfm
>
> Would anyone like to propose instruction suggestions?
>
> Then we as a group could sign into the SIG under our company name:
> comp.sys.cbm
William D. Mensch may be a little concern about that. Since WDC would be
requiring someone to be a CEO and he has been around long enough to know the
difference and definitely won't be fooled. (I am pretty certain that you
are joking here but there is also some credentials that you are required to
demonstrate.
I will give you an example of the Form you must fill out. (Not to mention
any NDA forms.)
---------------------------------------------------------
You must send the following (filled out) to l...@westerndesigncenter.com
and also a copy to ant...@westerndesigncenter.com
---------------------------------------------------------
To apply to join the Terbium SIG please provide the following information:
Last Name:
M.I.:
First Name:
e-mail:
Phone Number:
Fax Number:
Company:
Position:
Address:
URL:
How you could contribute to the Terbium SIG?
------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a definite NDA as well.
Dr. Bruce R. McFarling
> Jim Brain <br...@jbrain.com> writes:
>
> >Just asking. I'm not under the delusion that WDC will build such a
> >beast, and even if they did, I hate the '816 command set.
>
> I'm relieved to hear someone else say that. I can't stand it either, and
> you hear so many people raving about how nice it is that I thought I must
> be defective in the head. ^^;;
Its better for a standard Forth VM. I'm not sure how you can like the
6502 instruction set and not like 16-bit index mode. TEHO I guess.
But if you don't like it, there's always the 65C02 with all those zero
page bit testing, clearing and resetting instructions.
Jim Brain
> Cameron Kaiser <cka...@floodgap.com> wrote in message news:<40e22f17$0$43444$45be...@newscene.com>...
>
>>Jim Brain <br...@jbrain.com> writes:
>>
>>
>>>Just asking. I'm not under the delusion that WDC will build such a
>>>beast, and even if they did, I hate the '816 command set.
>>
>>I'm relieved to hear someone else say that. I can't stand it either, and
>>you hear so many people raving about how nice it is that I thought I must
>>be defective in the head. ^^;;
>
>
> Its better for a standard Forth VM. I'm not sure how you can like the
> 6502 instruction set and not like 16-bit index mode. TEHO I guess.
I like 16 bit indexing and registers. I just wish WDC had added
registers. The 816 is still register bound.
Jim
Hmmm, I seem to remember a Bruce McFarling WITHOUT a "Dr" title. Did we
recently get a PhD?
Dr. Bruce R. McFarling
> Hmmm, I seem to remember a Bruce McFarling WITHOUT a "Dr" title. Did we
> recently get a PhD?
No, when I moved from the branch campus to the city campus, I never
got around to setting up a news agent, and when I started using Google
news, I put in the title from force of habit -- the international
students from Asia aren't comfortable with leaving titles out. Now
I'm too lazy to take it out again, though its a bit silly ... it aint
a PhD in electrical engineering or computer science, so it doesn't
really mean anything in a comp.* newsgroup.
Dr. Bruce R. McFarling
> registers. The 816 is still register bound.
What, with a 256 byte register bank?
I admit that the register bank instructions could be more complete ...
I'd like to see PLZ z; PLZ z,X; PHZ z; PHZ z,X; INW z; INW z,X; JMP
((z)) and JMP ((z,X)).
For a stack machine, the 65816 has exactly enough registers ... a
hardware stack, a software return stack index (Y), an instruction
pointer (X), and an accumulator (A).