(Moved from Delphi list) Yes, there was an 80186. It was the embedded systems model, an 8086 with a DMA controller, Timers, Interrupt Controller and a few other toys on the chip. It had a few new instructions (array bounds, procedure entry/exit etc). I think it also had some of the more complex instructions (eg the string and block ones) implemented in silicon instead of in microcode as in the 8086. In the early-to-mid 80s things like dedicated network workstations often had 186 or 188 processors.
8086 - the original 16 bit processor with a 20-bit address space 8087 - floating point co-processor 8088 - 8086 with an 8-bit external bus, allowing systems like the IBM PC to be built using the previous generation of 8-bit components. 80186 - the integrated chipset including slightly enhanced 8086 80187 - numeric co-processor for 80186 80188 - 80186 with 8 bit external data path 80286 - still 16 bit, but had a memory management unit that gave it a 32-bit address space in "protected mode". Designed for multitasking systems, it was used in a lot of Unix/Xenix boxes. The 286 was the chip in the IBM PC AT, in which it was used as basically a faster 8086. 80287 - numeric co-processor for a 286 80288 - 286 with 8 bit external data path 80386 - the first 32-bit chip, with better memory management. It was also capable of emulating an 8086, or spawning multiple virtual 8086s. This was the chip that allowed Windows to start acting like an operating system. Windows 3.1 in "Enhanced mode" would put the processor into its 32-bit "protected mode" and then create one virtual 8086 for each DOS box and one to be shared by all the native Windows applications. 386 SX - a 386 with a 16-bit external data path (with the 32-bit data path, it was called a 386 DX) 387 - numeric co-processor for a 386. 486 - basically a faster 386, but with the numeric co-processor integrated. (486 DX) 486 SX - a 486 without the numeric processor (in early SXs, it was present but disabled) 486 DX2, SX2 - internal clock rate twice the external clock rate 486 DX4, SX4 - internal clock rate three (yes, three) times the external clock rate After that came the Pentiums. Brian ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pedrocelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 12:13 AM Subject: Re: [DUG] ShortInt, SmallInt > Just an aside - are you sure there was an 80186? I thought the '286 was the > direct successor to the 8086/8088 processors (which were essentially the same, > just commercially distinct). The "Mark 1" aspect was just implied by specifying > the "Mark 2" aspect of the 80286. > > Pedrocelli > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Neven MacEwan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 2:39 PM > Subject: Re: [DUG] ShortInt, SmallInt > > > At some point Intel developed/exposed a RISC instruction set, I thought > it was the 486 > The family goes (from memory) > > 8080 > 8085 > 8088 (IBM PC) > 8086 > 80186 > 80286 (IBM AT) > 80386 (Compaq) > 80486 > Pentium > > As for a 'RISC' core, all CISC processors have a RISC core (microcoded > or hardwired) > In my definition a RISC processor executes instructions in 1 cycle, and > as such I think you'll > find the majority of the pentium instruction set RISC, though it has a > CISC family lineage > > Neven MacEwan (B.E. E&E) > Ph. 09 621 0001 Mob. 0274 749062 > > > > Alister Christie wrote: > > > Thanks Neven, but I think you'll find that the 486 was CISC as were > > Pentiums, starting with the Pentium Pro the Intel went down the CISC > > interface / RISC core (where complex instructions were broken down > > into a reduced instruction set making them more easily pipelined) - > > they obviously could not just go RISC (like the PowerPC) due to the > > fact that it would make them incompatible with the x86 instruction set. > > > > But it has been a long time since I studied this kind of stuff so I > > could be wrong (and hopefully forgiven). > > > > Alister Christie > > Computers for People > > Ph: 04 471 1849 Fax: 04 471 1266 > > http://www.salespartner.co.nz > > PO Box 13085 > > Johnsonville > > Wellington > > > > > > Neven MacEwan wrote: > > > >> Alister > >> > >> My understanding is the the 386 was a CISC the 486 introduced a RISC > >> instruction set, For what it is worth you may consider a CISC > >> instruction as > >> a series of RISC instructions (microcode) in fact this is how they > >> are implemented > >> > >> Neven MacEwan (B.E. E&E) > >> Ph. 09 621 0001 Mob. 0274 749062 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Delphi mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://ns3.123.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/delphi > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Delphi mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://ns3.123.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/delphi > > _______________________________________________ > Delphi mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://ns3.123.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/delphi _______________________________________________ Offtopic mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ns3.123.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/offtopic
