21 Nov
1998
21 Nov
'98
10:54 a.m.
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 17:51:04 -0800
Reply-to: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu
From: "David C. Jenner" <djenner(a)halcyon.com>
To: "Discussion re-collecting of classic computers"
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: 16-bit 8088/8086?
Sounds like you are describing almost exactly the IBM
PC/XT286.
Blown that one!
XT 286 has 286 cpu and it applies acting like 8086 as real mode
operation but anything else doesn't apply to this original
defination.
The idea is to base some kind of 8086 or 8088 to act in place of 286
or (very sillier) 386. :)
Remember, 8088/8086 have LOOONG excution cycles far more what
286/386 cycles through intructions on average. 486 do 1 for
every 1 clock cycle or less (2 intructions on P5) on average.
optimizing the intruction codes to do best tightest run thoughs give
best solutions and it's most expensive than semi-canned and junk
canned codes.
IMHO, cool concept on that bassbackwards design!
Jason D.
Snip!
email: jpero(a)cgocable.net
Pero, Jason D.