15 May
2002
15 May
'02
6:50 a.m.
Looking for information on 16x4 ram (74F219), I came across the the
discussion of how many transistors are in a 6502. Did anybody ever
get a answer to that? A simple 16 bit cpu like the the toy/2 runs
at about 3300 transitors. A a simple stack machine about 3500???.
Does anybody have the transistor count for the PDP-8 chip 6100?
or the forgotton PACE-16 cpu by national. The SCAMP and PACE chips
don't seem to have a web page up anywhere on the web!
--
Ben Franchuk - Dawn * 12/24 bit cpu *
www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk/index.html
15 May
15 May
7:33 a.m.
I don't know what info you need, but the 74F219 is a chip I used in a 6502
emulation I built back in '80-something, and it's precisely a 74F189 with true
rather than inverting outputs.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Franchuk" <bfranchuk(a)jetnet.ab.ca>
To: <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:50 AM
Subject: [CCTALK] transistor counts again
Looking for information on 16x4 ram (74F219), I came
across the the
discussion of how many transistors are in a 6502. Did anybody ever
get a answer to that? A simple 16 bit cpu like the the toy/2 runs
at about 3300 transitors. A a simple stack machine about 3500???.
Does anybody have the transistor count for the PDP-8 chip 6100?
or the forgotton PACE-16 cpu by national. The SCAMP and PACE chips
don't seem to have a web page up anywhere on the web!
--
Ben Franchuk - Dawn * 12/24 bit cpu *
www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk/index.html
_______________________________________________
cctalk mailing list
cctalk(a)classiccmp.org
http://www.classiccmp.org/mailman/listinfo/cctalk
8:13 a.m.
Richard Erlacher wrote:
I don't know what info you need, but the 74F219 is a chip I used in a 6502
emulation I built back in '80-something, and it's precisely a 74F189 with true
rather than inverting outputs.
Well a 74LS219 or similar is what I would like. 16x4 non inverting ram
that is, but I don't think they are sold any more. Heck I am having
problems finding 74LS181's and 74LS670's.
(Anybody know a source in CANADA).
--
Ben Franchuk - Dawn * 12/24 bit cpu *
www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk/index.html
8:20 a.m.
--- Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk(a)jetnet.ab.ca> wrote:
Richard Erlacher wrote:
Well a 74LS219 or similar is what I would like. 16x4 non inverting ram
that is, but I don't think they are sold any more. Heck I am having
problems finding 74LS181's and 74LS670's.
(Anybody know a source in CANADA).
I have a small quantity of 74181s (from 1970-something, not LS AFAIK)
and 74F189s. I do not know of new sources... I got these from a high-
school electronics lab that was being cleaned out.
There are 4 74181s in that TI980A I recently landed. Docs are on
the way from the donor, I am perpetually promised.
-ethan
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
http://launch.yahoo.com
10:18 a.m.
Jameco has 74181s and 74LS181s -- can you not buy from them in Canada?
(Yea, I know they are relatively expensive...)
www.jameco.com
https://www.jameco.com/cgi-bin/ncommerce3/ProductDisplay?prmenbr=91&prr…
1754&cgrfnbr=501&ctgys=
https://www.jameco.com/cgi-bin/ncommerce3/ProductDisplay?prmenbr=91&prr…
1870&cgrfnbr=501&ctgys=
beware of the usual link wrap... Or just look under ICs (or search for
74181, 74LS181)
BG Micro (www.bgmicro.com) also claims to have ls181 for $1.15 each...
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ethan Dicks" <erd_6502(a)yahoo.com>
To: <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: [CCTALK] transistor counts again
--- Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk(a)jetnet.ab.ca> wrote:
Richard Erlacher wrote:
Well a 74LS219 or similar is what I would like. 16x4 non inverting ram
that is, but I don't think they are sold any more. Heck I am having
problems finding 74LS181's and 74LS670's.
(Anybody know a source in CANADA).
I have a small quantity of 74181s (from 1970-something, not LS AFAIK)
and 74F189s. I do not know of new sources... I got these from a high-
school electronics lab that was being cleaned out.
There are 4 74181s in that TI980A I recently landed. Docs are on
the way from the donor, I am perpetually promised.
-ethan
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
http://launch.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
cctalk mailing list
cctalk(a)classiccmp.org
http://www.classiccmp.org/mailman/listinfo/cctalk
7:35 a.m.
--- Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk(a)jetnet.ab.ca> wrote:
...I came across the the discussion of how many
transistors are in a
6502. Did anybody ever get a answer to that?
Dunno.
A simple 16 bit cpu like the the toy/2 runs
at about 3300 transitors. A a simple stack machine about 3500???.
The MC68000 is reputed to have approximately 68000 transistors, but
I've also heard that that number is weapons-grade bolognium.
Does anybody have the transistor count for the PDP-8
chip 6100?
No, but John B posted on his former PDP-8 web site that there are
just under 1,000 transistors in a PDP-8/S (not a microprocessor,
but it is easy to count them). I think it was 998 or 999.
or the forgotton PACE-16 cpu by national. The SCAMP
and PACE chips
don't seem to have a web page up anywhere on the web!
I think I've heard of the SCAMP, but I have never seen one. Never
heard of the PACE-16.
-ethan
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
http://launch.yahoo.com
7:53 a.m.
On Wed, 15 May 2002, Ethan Dicks wrote:
The MC68000 is reputed to have approximately 68000
transistors, but
I've also heard that that number is weapons-grade bolognium.
Yeah.
The 4004 was once rumored to have been named that because it had the
equivalent of 4004 transistors.
THAT is what probably gave rise to the 68000 silliness.
It's MUCH more impressive what was done with only 486!
8:01 a.m.
"Fred Cisin (XenoSoft)" wrote:
The 4004 was once rumored to have been named that
because it had the
equivalent of 4004 transistors.
THAT is what probably gave rise to the 68000 silliness.
It's MUCH more impressive what was done with only 486!
Shoudn't that read "80486"?
--
Andreas Freiherr
Vishay Semiconductor GmbH, Heilbronn, Germany
http://www.vishay.com
8:21 a.m.
> The 4004 was once rumored to have been named that
because it had the
> equivalent of 4004 transistors.
> THAT is what probably gave rise to the 68000 silliness.
> It's MUCH more impressive what was done with only 486!
On Wed, 15 May 2002, Andreas Freiherr wrote:
Shoudn't that read "80486"?
only
if we stick with intel!
That's what was so impressive about the Cyrix 486SLC, was that it DIDN'T
have the other 80,000! 'course it always seemed more like a fast 80386 to
me.
And the K6 does a really nice job with 6144!
and how about the Z80, V20, etc.?
8:41 a.m.
"Fred Cisin (XenoSoft)" wrote:
What about the PDP-1 ... 18 bits on 1 transitor. :)
--
Ben Franchuk - Dawn * 12/24 bit cpu *
www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk/index.html
> The 4004 was once rumored to have been named
that because it had the
> equivalent of 4004 transistors.
> THAT is what probably gave rise to the 68000 silliness.
> It's MUCH more impressive what was done with only 486!
On Wed, 15 May 2002, Andreas Freiherr wrote:
Shoudn't that read "80486"?
only if we stick with intel!
That's what was so impressive about the Cyrix 486SLC, was that it DIDN'T
have the other 80,000! 'course it always seemed more like a fast 80386 to
me.
And the K6 does a really nice job with 6144!
and how about the Z80, V20, etc.? 
2:03 p.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 491 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20020516/71ced7a1/at…
2:56 p.m.
I'd agree, though I have serious doubts about that number being in any sense
reflective of the number of transistors in the device. Remember that a
state-of-the-art CPU in 1979 (that humungous HP thing) claimed to have 400K+
transistors on it if the newspaper reports are to be believed. During that
same timespan, I understood that IBM was quietly putting 1M gates in their
in-house production gate arrays and in 1"-square packages with 80 pins, for
example. Density of packaging and of geometry didn't seem to stand in their
way.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Duell" <ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk>
To: <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: [CCTALK] transistor counts again
Yeah.
The 4004 was once rumored to have been named that because it had the
equivalent of 4004 transistors.
I find that hard to believe. The 4004 was part of a chipset containing
the 4001 (ROM), 4002 (RAM) and 4003 (I forget exactly what, some kind of
I/O?). The 4001 and 4002 parts were used in lots of 4004 or 4040-based
designs.
THAT is what probably gave rise to the 68000
silliness.
It's MUCH more impressive what was done with only 486!
That's 80486, surely :-)
-tony
_______________________________________________
cctalk mailing list
cctalk(a)classiccmp.org
http://www.classiccmp.org/mailman/listinfo/cctalk
2:58 p.m.
On Thu, 16 May 2002, Tony Duell wrote:
I never believed it. But is one of those pieces of bogus lore that keeps
resurfacing.
For intel. But what about the Cyrix 486SLC, AMD K6, etc? :-)
Yeah.
The 4004 was once rumored to have been named that because it had the
equivalent of 4004 transistors.
I find that hard to believe. The 4004 was part of
a chipset containing
the 4001 (ROM), 4002 (RAM) and 4003 (I forget exactly what, some kind of
I/O?). The 4001 and 4002 parts were used in lots of 4004 or 4040-based
designs. It's MUCH
more impressive what was done with only 486!
That's 80486, surely :-) 
4:32 p.m.
On Thu, 16 May 2002, Tony Duell wrote:
I find that hard to believe. The 4004 was part of a
chipset containing
the 4001 (ROM), 4002 (RAM) and 4003 (I forget exactly what, some kind of
I/O?). The 4001 and 4002 parts were used in lots of 4004 or 4040-based
designs.
And according to Ted Hoff, it was quite by accident that it ended up with
part number 4004. Coincidence and all.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
12:50 p.m.
The SC/MP does have web-representation
but I dunno the transistor count (yet)
I'll start searching for that number....
In the mean time you can play with
a SC/MP emulator:
http://xgistor.ath.cx/scmp.htm
Sipke de Wal
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Franchuk" <bfranchuk(a)jetnet.ab.ca>
To: <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 5:50 PM
Subject: [CCTALK] transistor counts again
Looking for information on 16x4 ram (74F219), I came
across the the
discussion of how many transistors are in a 6502. Did anybody ever
get a answer to that? A simple 16 bit cpu like the the toy/2 runs
at about 3300 transitors. A a simple stack machine about 3500???.
Does anybody have the transistor count for the PDP-8 chip 6100?
or the forgotton PACE-16 cpu by national. The SCAMP and PACE chips
don't seem to have a web page up anywhere on the web!
--
Ben Franchuk - Dawn * 12/24 bit cpu *
www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk/index.html
_______________________________________________
cctalk mailing list
cctalk(a)classiccmp.org
http://www.classiccmp.org/mailman/listinfo/cctalk
1:34 p.m.
Sipke de Wal wrote:
In the mean time you can play with
a SC/MP emulator:
http://xgistor.ath.cx/scmp.htm
Nice emulator. Thanks again.
--
Ben Franchuk - Dawn * 12/24 bit cpu *
www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk/index.html
8105
days inactive
8105
days old
15 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
Andreas.Freiherr＠Vishay.com -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
bill_mcdermith＠yahoo.com -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
edick＠idcomm.com -
erd_6502＠yahoo.com -
foo＠siconic.com -
sipke＠wxs.nl