6 May
2010
6 May
'10
11:08 p.m.
> Well, the 8080 can't do a 16-bit by 16-bit
multiply to get a 32-bit
> product, so that's an obvious difference.
So, therefore, we all agree that the 8080 is NOT a 32-bit processor!
See, it's not all that cut-and-dried. I think
we need to defer to
what is "commonly accepted" amongst the learned. Everyone knows the
Who are the "learned"?
8080 is an 8-bit processor and the 8086/8088 are
16-bit processors. But
you CAN, if you try hard enough, define them differently.
Aside from disparaging others' definitions, does anybody have a decent
definition?
Are the registers 16 bit registers that can be split into two 8 bit?
or are they pairs of 8 bit registers that can be used together for 16 bit
values?
Is the size of the data bus irrelevant?
(There have been people who maintain that THAT is the measure of the
processor!)
The software of an 8088 looks like 16 bit; the hardware of an 8088 looks
an awful lot like 8 bit. There are people who consider the 8088 to be an
8-bit and consider the 8086 to be 15 bit, in spite of their
"similarities".
What do you consider 80386 to be?
how about the 80386-SX? It's hardware seems similar to 80286; what is
THAT?
What the hell is a "Celeron"? or a "Dragonball"? or an
"Atom"?