30 Sep
2001
30 Sep
'01
8:31 a.m.
Wrong!
The I8080A is AS fast as the i8080. the i8080A-1 is faster but not twice
as the fastest 8080[A] was only 3mhz and hte standard part was 2mhz.
Allison
-----Original Message-----
From: John Galt <gmphillips(a)earthlink.net>
To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Date: Sunday, September 30, 2001 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: 8080 vs. 8080A
the
"The i8080A is essentially twice as fast as the
standard i8080 and COULD be used more easily with low-power logic since
its
demands aren't as stringent".
Ok, that's a good start.
But, I don't think "low power" TTL (transistor transistor logic) had
anything to do with the complexity of the code being executed on the
chip.
True? I had assumed
that the references to the 8080 only being compatible
with "low-power TTL" and the 8080A being compatible
with "standard TTL" had something to do with the support chips (Ram,
clock,
etc) that could be used with the 8080 vs. the 8080A.
Since I'm new to this mail list, let me explain why I would
show up here and ask such a question to begin with.
I'm a chip collector. I am trying to document the differences between
the
different early Intel microprocessors. Not worried
about massive
detail,
just the major differences (PMOS, vs. NMOS, vs.
HMOS, clock speed, transistor count, etc).
The only microprocessor that I don't have a good handle
on is the 8080 and the difference between the 8080 and 8080A.
I also know that the 8080 was introduced sometime
around April 1974. I have not been able to find an
introduction date for the 8080A. Was it introduced at
the same time? Does anyone know?
I also need an Intel C8080 or C8080-8 for my
collection. If you have one, I want it. I have been looking
for one for months and have not been able to find one.
If you have either of these chips in good condition
(no desoldered parts wanted), I'm offering 400.00
for the C8080-8 and 500.00 for a C8080.
If you need a replacement for the C8080 or C8080-8 you sell me, I'll
GIVE
you a D8080A free as part of the
deal.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Erlacher" <edick(a)idcomm.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 1:21 PM
Subject: Re: 8080 vs. 8080A
> This makes no sense at all, though it may be because I'm
misinterpreting
the way
> in which you've put it.
>
> I have Intel boards that come in versions with the i8080 and also,
> optionally,with the i8080A, and, aside from the clock frequency and
memory
> access times, they're identical. The i8080A
is essentially twice as
fast
as the
> standard i8080 and COULD be used more easily with low-power logic
since
its
> demands aren't as stringent.
>
> The i8080A will, AFAIK, replace the i8080 in all applications without
ill
effects.
BTW, please turn off "rich-text" mode in your email editor when you
compose
> messages for this group, as some folks' mail readers can't interpret
> rich-text/HTML format.
>
> Dick
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: John Galt
> To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
> Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 10:17 AM
> Subject: 8080 vs. 8080A
>
>
> Can anyone here describe the technical differences between
> an Intel 8080 and Intel 8080A CPU?
>
> The ONLY ref. I have been able to find seems to indicate that there
was a
bug in
> the 8080 and as a result it would only work with low power TTL?
>
> The problem was fixed in the 8080A and it would work with standard
TTL?
Does this make sense to anyone?
Could anyone put this into laymans terms for me?
Thanks,
George Phillips - gmphillips(a)earthlink.net
30 Sep
30 Sep
9:40 a.m.
The half-dozen or so I8020/4 boards I have all have i8080A CPU's in them, and
each is clocked at 4.(something very small) MHz, IIRC. Are you saying that
Intel ran these >1 MHz above spec? I've also seen numerous applications in
which they were driven at the color burst frequency from some harmonic of that.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "ajp166" <ajp166(a)bellatlantic.net>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 2:31 PM
Subject: Re: 8080 vs. 8080A
Wrong!
The I8080A is AS fast as the i8080. the i8080A-1 is faster but not twice
as the fastest 8080[A] was only 3mhz and hte standard part was 2mhz.
Allison
-----Original Message-----
From: John Galt <gmphillips(a)earthlink.net>
To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Date: Sunday, September 30, 2001 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: 8080 vs. 8080A
the
"The i8080A is essentially twice as fast as
the
standard i8080 and COULD be used more easily with low-power logic since
its
demands aren't as stringent".
Ok, that's a good start.
But, I don't think "low power" TTL (transistor transistor logic) had
anything to do with the complexity of the code being executed on the
chip.
True? I had assumed
that the references to the 8080 only being compatible
with "low-power TTL" and the 8080A being compatible
with "standard TTL" had something to do with the support chips (Ram,
clock,
etc) that could be used with the 8080 vs. the
8080A.
Since I'm new to this mail list, let me explain why I would
show up here and ask such a question to begin with.
I'm a chip collector. I am trying to document the differences between
the
different early Intel microprocessors. Not
worried about massive
detail,
just the major differences (PMOS, vs. NMOS, vs.
HMOS, clock speed, transistor count, etc).
The only microprocessor that I don't have a good handle
on is the 8080 and the difference between the 8080 and 8080A.
I also know that the 8080 was introduced sometime
around April 1974. I have not been able to find an
introduction date for the 8080A. Was it introduced at
the same time? Does anyone know?
I also need an Intel C8080 or C8080-8 for my
collection. If you have one, I want it. I have been looking
for one for months and have not been able to find one.
If you have either of these chips in good condition
(no desoldered parts wanted), I'm offering 400.00
for the C8080-8 and 500.00 for a C8080.
If you need a replacement for the C8080 or C8080-8 you sell me, I'll
GIVE
you a D8080A free as part of the
deal.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Erlacher" <edick(a)idcomm.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 1:21 PM
Subject: Re: 8080 vs. 8080A
> This makes no sense at all, though it may be because I'm
misinterpreting
the way
> in which you've put it.
>
> I have Intel boards that come in versions with the i8080 and also,
> optionally,with the i8080A, and, aside from the clock frequency and
memory
> access times, they're identical. The
i8080A is essentially twice as
fast
as the
> standard i8080 and COULD be used more easily with low-power logic
since
its
> demands aren't as stringent.
>
> The i8080A will, AFAIK, replace the i8080 in all applications without
ill
effects.
BTW, please turn off "rich-text" mode in your email editor when you
compose
> messages for this group, as some folks' mail readers can't interpret > rich-text/HTML format.
>
> Dick
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: John Galt
> To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
> Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 10:17 AM
> Subject: 8080 vs. 8080A
>
>
> Can anyone here describe the technical differences between
> an Intel 8080 and Intel 8080A CPU?
>
> The ONLY ref. I have been able to find seems to indicate that there
was a
bug in
> the 8080 and as a result it would only work with low power TTL?
>
> The problem was fixed in the 8080A and it would work with standard
TTL?
Does this make sense to anyone?
Could anyone put this into laymans terms for me?
Thanks,
George Phillips - gmphillips(a)earthlink.net
9:43 a.m.
BTW, the 8080 was a 2.5 MHz part, wasn't it? I've got a couple Intel app-notes
where they generate a baud-rate clock from 24.576 MHz and generate the CPU clock
from that, at 2.4576 MHz for the CPU. That's on an
i8080-2.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "ajp166" <ajp166(a)bellatlantic.net>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 2:31 PM
Subject: Re: 8080 vs. 8080A
Wrong!
The I8080A is AS fast as the i8080. the i8080A-1 is faster but not twice
as the fastest 8080[A] was only 3mhz and hte standard part was 2mhz.
Allison
-----Original Message-----
From: John Galt <gmphillips(a)earthlink.net>
To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Date: Sunday, September 30, 2001 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: 8080 vs. 8080A
the
"The i8080A is essentially twice as fast as
the
standard i8080 and COULD be used more easily with low-power logic since
its
demands aren't as stringent".
Ok, that's a good start.
But, I don't think "low power" TTL (transistor transistor logic) had
anything to do with the complexity of the code being executed on the
chip.
True? I had assumed
that the references to the 8080 only being compatible
with "low-power TTL" and the 8080A being compatible
with "standard TTL" had something to do with the support chips (Ram,
clock,
etc) that could be used with the 8080 vs. the
8080A.
Since I'm new to this mail list, let me explain why I would
show up here and ask such a question to begin with.
I'm a chip collector. I am trying to document the differences between
the
different early Intel microprocessors. Not
worried about massive
detail,
just the major differences (PMOS, vs. NMOS, vs.
HMOS, clock speed, transistor count, etc).
The only microprocessor that I don't have a good handle
on is the 8080 and the difference between the 8080 and 8080A.
I also know that the 8080 was introduced sometime
around April 1974. I have not been able to find an
introduction date for the 8080A. Was it introduced at
the same time? Does anyone know?
I also need an Intel C8080 or C8080-8 for my
collection. If you have one, I want it. I have been looking
for one for months and have not been able to find one.
If you have either of these chips in good condition
(no desoldered parts wanted), I'm offering 400.00
for the C8080-8 and 500.00 for a C8080.
If you need a replacement for the C8080 or C8080-8 you sell me, I'll
GIVE
you a D8080A free as part of the
deal.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Erlacher" <edick(a)idcomm.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 1:21 PM
Subject: Re: 8080 vs. 8080A
> This makes no sense at all, though it may be because I'm
misinterpreting
the way
> in which you've put it.
>
> I have Intel boards that come in versions with the i8080 and also,
> optionally,with the i8080A, and, aside from the clock frequency and
memory
> access times, they're identical. The
i8080A is essentially twice as
fast
as the
> standard i8080 and COULD be used more easily with low-power logic
since
its
> demands aren't as stringent.
>
> The i8080A will, AFAIK, replace the i8080 in all applications without
ill
effects.
BTW, please turn off "rich-text" mode in your email editor when you
compose
> messages for this group, as some folks' mail readers can't interpret > rich-text/HTML format.
>
> Dick
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: John Galt
> To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
> Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 10:17 AM
> Subject: 8080 vs. 8080A
>
>
> Can anyone here describe the technical differences between
> an Intel 8080 and Intel 8080A CPU?
>
> The ONLY ref. I have been able to find seems to indicate that there
was a
bug in
> the 8080 and as a result it would only work with low power TTL?
>
> The problem was fixed in the 8080A and it would work with standard
TTL?
Does this make sense to anyone?
Could anyone put this into laymans terms for me?
Thanks,
George Phillips - gmphillips(a)earthlink.net
8265
days inactive
8265
days old
2 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
ajp166＠bellatlantic.net -
edick＠idcomm.com