I believe I read they weaved the planes this way to minimize crosstalk, EMI
or heat.
=]
On Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 1:13 PM Paul Koning via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
wrote:
On Apr 18, 2019, at 11:47 AM, Jon Elson via
cctalk <
cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 04/18/2019 04:49 AM, Brent Hilpert via cctalk wrote:
> It's a 4-wire 3D planar array. By topology and construction I would
guess
it date it from the 60s.
Make that EARLY '60s. As soon as somebody
figured out that you could
combine the sense and inhibit wires, everybody
immediately went to 3-wire
planes.
Jon
Is that true even for the highest speed designs?
CDC 6000 series memory is unusual in that it has 5 wires per core.
Instead of the classic X, Y, Inhibit, Sense it has two inhibit wires,
routed in the X and Y direction. There are four X and four Y inhibit
wires, each of which run through 1/4th of the cores, so a given inhibit
pair acts on 1/16th of the cores.
The documentation doesn't spell out why this is done. My guess is that it
makes the various driven wires more alike in how many cores they pass
through. X and Y, in the 12 bit stack, pass through 64 * 12 cores. Each
inhibit wire passes through 64 * 16 cores, i.e., nearly the same number.
And the driver circuits for all these wires are the same.
A regular full-plane inhibit wire would pass through 4k cores, meaning the
inductance is far higher than that of the X and Y wires. So either the
drive circuit would require a lot more power, or it would be significantly
slower than the X/Y drive.
As for separate sense, split inhibit obviously requires that, but even
with conventional inhibit, keeping sense separate avoids the overhead of
switching the signal path between two very different bits of circuitry.
Compared to many other core memory designs of that same era, the 6000
memory is quite fast, with access times of a few hundred nanoseconds and
full cycle (read plus restore) in one microsecond. Actually, comfortably
under 1 microsecond, allowing for magic like read and update in one cycle
(for the exchange instruction in the CPU) or read and write new data in one
cycle via the ALU data path (in the PPUs). I suspect the unusual core
plane design was a factor in making this speed possible.
paul