(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
