6 May
2001
6 May
'01
4:14 a.m.
Real data is nice, but I find it odd that the 6502 shows up with so much more
die size when the transistor count matches the 6800 so closely. The Z80, and
6502 were both presumably built with more or less the same design rules, and, as
one might expect, the 6800 and 6502 should have approximately the same
transistor count, having approximately the same internal resources. Note how
the figure for the 8085 tracks the Z80 figure, scaled back for the fact it (the
8085) lacks the alternate register set, approximately. I don't trust the
indicated die-size, however, since, back in '76, when the 650x series was new,
it was reputed to have the smallest die size of any of the then-current 8-bit
CPU's. After all, that's how they (MOS Technology) bought their market share.
Everything seems to fit, with the exception of that die size figure in this
case.
The 8008 was a couple of generations earlier than the 8085, but the 8085, 6502,
and Z80 were all built in the same geometry. The 8080 and 6800 were both about
the same generation, hence also built in the same design rules and geometry.
Note that the 1802 die is bigger, being a CMOS device.
The die size for the 68K also seems to match what I remember of the die that was
glued to my datasheet at that sales pitch I mentioned in an earlier post. Keep
in mind, however, that the area was 1/4 that of the previous generation, as
there had been a halving of the drawn channel widths. While I believe that the
transistor count may have been more of a marketing ploy than a reliable count,
if you take into consideration the relatively large register size and count
contained in the 68K and combine that with the substantially smaller geometry in
which it was fabricated, it seems to match up with the majority of the remaining
figures.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Cheponis" <mac(a)Wireless.Com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2001 11:19 AM
Subject: Re: How many transistors in the 6502 processor?
From Microprocessor Report, in chronological order:
8008: 3.5K transistors 14 mm^2
6800: 4.1K transistors 16 mm^2
8080: 4.8K transistors 20 mm^2
1802: 5K transistors 27 mm^2
6502: 4K transistors 21 mm^2
Z80: 8.5K transistors 18 mm^2
8085: 6.5K transistors 20 mm^2
8086: 29K transistors 33 mm^2
8088: 29K transistors 33 mm^2
Z8001 17.5K transistors 39 mm^2
68000 68K transistors 44 mm^2
6809: 9K transistors 21 mm^2
I really hate to interrupt this group's speculation with actual data, but
I'm weird in that way.
-Mike
On Sat, 5 May 2001, Sipke de Wal wrote:
> Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 16:34:41 +0200
> From: Sipke de Wal <sipke(a)wxs.nl>
> Reply-To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
> To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: How many transistors in the 6502 processor?
>
> I tend to trust the 4000 number more also........
>
> Especially since the source article that gives 9000 transistors
> for the 6502 has a few other flaws. most strikingly.....
>
> ...... naming the Z80 as the host of CP/M where that clearly should
> have been the 8080. That the Z80 is downward compatible is
> nice but the native CP/M assembler was an 8080 assembler not
> a Z80 assembler.
>
> Sipke de Wal
> ------------------------------------------------
> http://xgistor.ath.cx
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Richard Erlacher <edick(a)idcomm.com>
> To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
> Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2001 4:20 PM
> Subject: Re: How many transistors in the 6502 processor?
>
>
> > While I don't know what the "real" numbers are, I'm inclined
to believe
this
(4000) number, at least relative to the others just
based on the internal
resources.