9 Feb
1999
9 Feb
'99
10:07 a.m.
mbg(a)world.std.com (Megan) wrote:
How about simply making them available from some site somewhere
and sending everyone a pointer...
Megan Gentry
Former RT-11 Developer
Hi Megan
I have the ftp on a later mail. I would like people that
use it or download it to contact me first. I am still making
the occational enhancement and will keep a list.
The simulator was specifically setup for the SIM4-01
board but could be easily modified for most any hardware.
It is just a matter of mapping RAM and I/O's to different
variables or arrays. All the source is there so one can
dig into it as much as one wants. Most of the changes
I've been making are to add comments to some of the less
clear coding I did. As I reread it, I often realize
it isn't even clear to me and I know it needs a comment.
I'm always looking for feed back as well. The entire thing
can be easily expanded to deal with the 4040 as well.
Anyone wanting to do such, should let me know.
Dwight
9 Feb
9 Feb
10:35 a.m.
On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, Dwight Elvey wrote:
The simulator was specifically setup for the SIM4-01
board but could be easily modified for most any hardware.
Hi, Dwight.
Could you give us more info about the SIM4 board? I've always been
somewhat confused by Intel's naming conventions, and since this is a very
historically significant computer, I want to understand what's what.
Here's what I *think* I understand:
Intel made the 4004 CPU in 1971 as part of a complete computer chip set
called the MCS-4 (MCS = Micro Computer Set). They also created a few
computer systems around the MCS-4, including
* the Intellec-4, a full fledged system with front-panel
* the SIM-4, a single-board computer for evaluation
Did they make any others? I think there were variations of the SIM-4,
right? Dates?
Thanks,
Doug
11:36 a.m.
Doug <doug(a)blinkenlights.com> wrote:
On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, Dwight Elvey wrote:
Hi Doug
The SIM4-01 was made to take 4 1702's for program ROMs and
had 4 4002 RAM chips. The board had simulated I/O to act like
the I/O that came on the 4001 mask ROM chips. There was also
a SIM4-02 board that could take up to sixteen PROMs and had
sixteen 4002 RAM chips. The MCS-4 chip set originally included
4004 ( uP ), 4001 ( Mask ROM and 4 I/O pins ) and the 4002
( RAM and 4 Outputs ). Later additions were the 4003 ( Serial/Parallel
I/O ) and 4008/4009 ( TTL level converters ).
The Intellec-4 was made later. The Intellec-4 was soon replaced with
the Intellec-4/40 that used the newer 4040 version of the
4004. They were bus compatible. When I was at Intel, I think
we were the last to use the 4040's in our UPP ( Universal Prom
Programmer ).
The 4004 used a Harvard architecture and had some what of a restricted
instruction set. It didn't even include such things as bitwise
AND and OR. These had to be generated by using the add instruction
and built a bit at a time. The adder at a bit location is
the XOR of the bits and the carry generated is the AND of
the bits.
The SIM4-01 usually came with a back plane board called the
MCB-4 and a PROM programmer card called MP7-0x. Depending on
revision, it was designed to program 1702, 1602, 1701, 1601
and later versions did 1702A's. It should also be noted that,
as I recall, Intel also made the first EPROMs. The SIM4-01 board
came with 3 PROM's with code to program the PROMs. The board, using the I/O
space of the ROM's and RAM's, had a 20ma current loop serial.
Luckily they were using ASCII instead of Baudit in those
days. I made a simple RS232 interface to convert to my
PC at 110 Baud. I'll try to get a picture up on my
web page for show and tell.
Intel originally made the 4004 for a company call Busicom.
It was to be used in one of their calculators. It was
dropped in favor of a dedicated calculator chip but
as we know, many applications were just waiting for the
uP to happen.
I'm not sure of all the dates but the 4004 was introduced
in 1971. My SIM4-01 board has all the date codes in 1972.
Many think that the 8008 was the first 8 bit uP but
Fairchild was first with a two chip F8 by a small margin.
Wow, I feel old. I remember reading about the 8008 when
it first came out.
Dwight
The simulator was specifically setup for the
SIM4-01
board but could be easily modified for most any hardware.
Hi, Dwight.
Could you give us more info about the SIM4 board? I've always been
somewhat confused by Intel's naming conventions, and since this is a very
historically significant computer, I want to understand what's what.
Here's what I *think* I understand:
Intel made the 4004 CPU in 1971 as part of a complete computer chip set
called the MCS-4 (MCS = Micro Computer Set). They also created a few
computer systems around the MCS-4, including
* the Intellec-4, a full fledged system with front-panel
* the SIM-4, a single-board computer for evaluation
Did they make any others? I think there were variations of the SIM-4,
right? Dates? 
2:54 p.m.
New subject: Intel 4040 - was Intel 4004 simulator and tools
Dwight Elvey wrote:
The entire thing
can be easily expanded to deal with the 4040 as well.
Anyone wanting to do such, should let me know.
Do you have any info on the differences between the 4040 and the 4004?
Regards,
_---_--__-_-_----__-_----_-__-__-_-___--_-__--___-__----__--_--__-___-
Hans B Pufal Comprehensive Computer Catalogue
<mailto:hansp@digiweb.com> <http://digiweb.com/~hansp/ccc>
5:33 p.m.
New subject: Intel 4040 - was Intel 4004 simulator and tools
On Wed, 10 Feb 1999, Hans B Pufal wrote:
Dwight Elvey wrote:
The 4040 was actually very different from the 4004. The 8008 is closer in
architecture to the 4004 than the 4040. The 4040 was actually a very
different design from the 4004. I'll have to dig up my notes on the
specifics, but I'm sure someone will (has) beat me to it.
Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Always hasslin' the man.
Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0
See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 01/15/99]
The entire thing
can be easily expanded to deal with the 4040 as well.
Anyone wanting to do such, should let me know.
Do you have any info on the differences between the 4040 and the 4004? 
6:49 p.m.
New subject: Intel 4040 - was Intel 4004 simulator and tools
Sam wrote:
The 4040 was actually very different from the 4004.
The 8008 is closer in
architecture to the 4004 than the 4040. The 4040 was actually a very
different design from the 4004.
Not really. The 4040 was just an improved 4004 with more registers, a few
more instructions, and a few more select lines (so that it could address more
memory).
The 8008 was quite different than the 4004 and 4040. The 4004 and 4040 have
a more elegant architecture in some ways, such as the organization of the
general registers, but the 8008 wins in others, such as the single flat
address space.
The 8080 is fairly different than the 8008. Aside from using the same names
for the registers, there's not that much similarity.
10 Feb
10 Feb
3:27 a.m.
New subject: Intel 4040 - was Intel 4004 simulator and tools
On 10 Feb 1999, Eric Smith wrote:
Sam wrote:
I'm getting this opinion straight from Ted Hoff himself. I don't know
where my notes are on this and I can't remember the details, but I think
there are some significant differences between the 4040 and 4004. The
8008 was supposed to have been based on the 4004 architecture, extending
it with more instructions and such. The 4040 was, I think, a whole
different design by a different team inside Intel.
I'll have to find my notes I guess.
Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Always hasslin' the man.
Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0
See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 01/15/99]
The 4040 was actually very different from the
4004. The 8008 is closer in
architecture to the 4004 than the 4040. The 4040 was actually a very
different design from the 4004.
Not really. The 4040 was just an improved 4004 with more registers, a
few more instructions, and a few more select lines (so that it could
address more memory).
4:19 a.m.
New subject: Intel 4040 - was Intel 4004 simulator and tools
Sam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> wrote:
I'm getting this opinion straight from Ted Hoff himself. I don't know
where my notes are on this and I can't remember the details, but I think
there are some significant differences between the 4040 and 4004. The
8008 was supposed to have been based on the 4004 architecture, extending
it with more instructions and such. The 4040 was, I think, a whole
different design by a different team inside Intel.
Hi Sam
From the outside, the 4040 was quite similar to the 4004.
The 4040 was in a different 24 pin package but used the same multiplexed
4 bit bus and could use the 4001/4002 parts. There may have been
many differences internally. Code wise, the 4040 will run
all of the 4004's machine instructions and there were about
10 or so instructions added. There was a slight difference
about what was on the bus during the execution cycles. As
I recall the 4040 had the ALU available on the bus during
the last cycle. I have a data manual describing all of the
4004 and 4040 instructions. As was mentioned, the 8008
was quite a bit different.
When I worked at Intel in the late 70's, I worked on
the UPP ( Universal Prom Programmer ). I was involved in
system test. There were few tools made to deal with
debugging these early uP's. I built what I called a
"Slow Time Ice". One could remove the 4040 and plug this
unit in. I ran a continous clock on the 4040's buss and
would take input from a MDS800 or Series II. It allowed
one to read/write any of the ROM, RAM or I/O on the UPP.
Only one of these was ever built.
As for the questions of where I got the 4004, I found it
at a local electronic surplus store. I bought the entire
setup for $25, as I recall, about 10 years ago. I
knew it was a valuable item to save.
For those that don't have a 4004 to play with yet, they
can use my Assembler/Simulator to play with the instruction set.
It isn't quite real hardware but almost runs as fast.
Dwight
8:19 a.m.
New subject: Intel 4040 - was Intel 4004 simulator and tools
Sam wrote:
The 4040 was, I think, a whole
different design by a different team inside Intel.
Maybe so. But the Pentium and Pentium Pro were designed by a whole different
design team inside Intel, and they seem to be fairly compatible.
If you look at the 4004 and 4040 data sheets, you will find that it has:
The same instruction set, with a few additions
The same register arrangement, only with more of them
The same bus, but with more memory select lines
What it doesn't have is the same pinout. It's not a drop-in replacement
for the 4004. But then, the 8008 isn't a drop-in replacement for the 4004
either, and the 8080 isn't a drop-in replacement for the 8008. On the
other hand, if you wire up a simple adapter, you can put the 4040 in a
4004 system and it will work fine as long as the firmware doesn't depend
on illegal 4004 opcodes or non-existent registers.
On the other hand, when you compare the 4004 and 4040 data sheets with
the 8008 data sheet, you find that they have
Entirely different instruction sets
Entirely different register sets
Entirely different memory architecture
I'll have to find my notes I guess.
I'm certainly interested in what Ted Hoff has to say about it, but if he
wasn't actually on the 4040 team, then he isn't necessarily an expert on
it. I don't know any of the details of how these parts were designed,
other than what's in the published accounts, but I know how to read
data sheets.
Eric
5:13 a.m.
New subject: Intel 4040 - was Intel 4004 simulator and tools
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 421 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19990210/9c620e2d/at…
5:01 a.m.
New subject: Intel 4040 - was Intel 4004 simulator and tools
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19990210/517b4db8/at…
9446
days inactive
9447
days old
10 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
dastar＠ncal.verio.com -
doug＠blinkenlights.com -
elvey＠hal.com -
eric＠brouhaha.com -
hansp＠digiweb.com