Question AMD had processors in a "PC" before IBM !

[Markfw]

So, not sure what started me down this path, but Tektronix has four AMD Am2901 4-bit bit-slice processors used together to make a single 16-bit processor. It was released in 1978. The IBM PC was released in 1981. So AMD had the first Pc. But pricing was out of this world, except the display was included and well as keyboard. This and the 4051 (based on motorola 68000 processor) were used in the show Battlestar Galactica !



I not only programmed on this as my first language, but tough a class on it at Portland Community college !! It stored the program on the internal tape drive, and when the program reached its limit of memory would (when you programmed t this way) would basically wipe out the first section of code, go to track 2, and load the next section of code.

From Wikipedia "Released in 1978, the 4052 came with a full 32 kB of RAM for $9,795 ($46,100 in 2023 dollars) " and...

I don't see pricing on the IBM PC from wikipedia.

Please comment if I missed some important details.

 

[dullard]

So AMD had the first Pc.

The Altair 8800 is widely considered the first PC in 1974. $621 when assembled, $439 in kit form.

Altair 8800 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Although this source puts the price a bit cheaper:

Altair 8800 Microcomputer

Not long after Intel introduced its 8080 chip, a small firm in Albuquerque, New Mexico, named MITS (Micro Instrumentation and Telemetry Systems) announced…

americanhistory.si.edu

With all the bells and whistles it was $4000 though.

 

[Markfw]

The Altair 8800 is widely considered the first PC in 1974. $621 when assembled, $439 in kit form.

Altair 8800 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Although this source puts the price a bit cheaper:

Altair 8800 Microcomputer

Not long after Intel introduced its 8080 chip, a small firm in Albuquerque, New Mexico, named MITS (Micro Instrumentation and Telemetry Systems) announced…

americanhistory.si.edu

With all the bells and whistles it was $4000 though.

Thanks for that. But with no display ? Maybe the 4051 was the first and the 4052 the second. The 4051 was Motorola 68000, but I guess the point now is, that AMD beat IMB and Intel to the first with a display ????

 

[dullard]

Thanks for that. But with no display ? Maybe the 4051 was the first and the 4052 the second. The 4051 was Motorola 68000, but I guess the point now is, that AMD beat IMB and Intel to the first with a display ????

Here is another big player prior to IBM, with a display, the Tandy TRS-80, launched in 1977: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS-80 This was the computer that IBM decided to copy.

I'm not sure why you keep trying to make a story here about someone beating someone else to the first PC.

 

[Markfw]

Here is another big player prior to IBM, with a display, the Tandy TRS-80, launched in 1977: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS-80 This was the computer that IBM decided to copy.

I'm not sure why you keep trying to make a story here about someone beating someone else to the first PC.

Well, since I worked for Tektronix for 20 years, and spent 5 years writing code on the 4052 and taught classes on how to program in 405x basic, I was surprised to know it was AMD processors. And based on my research, I thought it was first. BTW, the TRS80 had to have a TV to create its output. I also taught a class on programming one of the commodore (spelling?) units. Also, the TRS80 was not really a programming language, and I don't remember how to save code on it. It was a Radio Shack toy as I remember.

I don't know why you are trying to cut me down.

 

[Abwx]

So, not sure what started me down this path, but Tektronix has four AMD Am2901 4-bit bit-slice processors used together to make a single 16-bit processor. It was released in 1978. The IBM PC was released in 1981. So AMD had the first Pc. But pricing was out of this world, except the display was included and well as keyboard. This and the 4051 (based on motorola 68000 processor) were used in the show Battlestar Galactica !

View attachment 122665

I not only programmed on this as my first language, but tough a class on it at Portland Community college !! It stored the program on the internal tape drive, and when the program reached its limit of memory would (when you programmed t this way) would basically wipe out the first section of code, go to track 2, and load the next section of code.

From Wikipedia "Released in 1978, the 4052 came with a full 32 kB of RAM for $9,795 ($46,100 in 2023 dollars) " and...

I don't see pricing on the IBM PC from wikipedia.

Please comment if I missed some important details.

Guess that it was an in house evolution around Texas Instrument SN74181 from 1970, wich was a basic 4 bit ALU that could be daisy chained to get 8, 16, or even 64 bit, but for each added ALU there was one more exe cycle due to the carry, max frequency was up to 45MHz for the first model, wich was considerable at the time.

74181 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Win2012R2]

It was released in 1978. The IBM PC was released in 1981. So AMD had the first Pc.

No - anything before IBM PC was not a PC!

 

[Abwx]

Anything Z80 or 6502 was a PC, FI Sinclair s ZX 80 and ZX81, IBM s PC was just one of the first using a X86 CPU.

 

[eek2121]

Here is another big player prior to IBM, with a display, the Tandy TRS-80, launched in 1977: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS-80 This was the computer that IBM decided to copy.

I'm not sure why you keep trying to make a story here about someone beating someone else to the first PC.

You reminded me: my first computer was the Tandy Color Computer 2!

No - anything before IBM PC was not a PC!

This is actually the correct answer.

 

[LightningDust]

There were many, many microcomputers from the mid to late 1970s and in no universe was AMD 29-series bitslice logic in the first one. What a bizarre thread this is.

 

[ReaganFornell]

So, not sure what started me down this path, but Tektronix has four AMD Am2901 4-bit bit-slice processors used together to make a single 16-bit processor. It was released in 1978. The IBM PC was released in 1981. So AMD had the first Pc. But pricing was out of this world, except the display was included and well as keyboard. This and the 4051 (based on motorola 68000 processor) were used in the show Battlestar Galactica !

I not only programmed on this as my first language, but tough a class on it at Portland Community college !! It stored the program on the internal tape drive, and when the program reached its limit of memory would (when you programmed t this way) would basically wipe out the first section of code, go to track 2, and load the next section of code.

From Wikipedia "Released in 1978, the 4052 came with a full 32 kB of RAM for $9,795 ($46,100 in 2023 dollars) " and...

I don't see pricing on the IBM PC from wikipedia.

Please comment if I missed some important details.

Great insight! The Tektronix systems with AMD’s Am2901 were powerful early personal computers, predating IBM’s PC. Their advanced features, like tape paging and built-in display, were truly ahead of their time.

 

[igor_kavinski]

There were many, many microcomputers from the mid to late 1970s and in no universe was AMD 29-series bitslice logic in the first one. What a bizarre thread this is.

Many people here didn't know about this PC and OP has personal experience programming with it. I don't see where the negativity is coming from. Are we going to discourage people from creating informative threads inviting more discussion? He thought it was the first PC. Others disagreed. Everything seems to be going fine. What is bizarre about this?

 

[LightningDust]

Many people here didn't know about this PC and OP has personal experience programming with it. I don't see where the negativity is coming from. Are we going to discourage people from creating informative threads inviting more discussion? He thought it was the first PC. Others disagreed. Everything seems to be going fine. What is bizarre about this?

The clear "lol intel sucks" tone combined with a total lack of apparent curiosity or knowledge of 70s micros. For the gods' sake, the Apple I and Apple II both predated this expensive thing, cost a few hundred bucks - and the Apple II sold many millions of units. Furthermore, calling the 29-series bitslice logic "processors" is a stretch - they were integrated logic blocks you could make a processor (or other things) out of, like the common 74-series logic.

Basically, bad history combined with a partisan desire to one-up Intel. Unimpressed. @dullard had the correct take.

 

[igor_kavinski]

Furthermore, calling the 29-series bitslice logic "processors" is a stretch - they were integrated logic blocks you could make a processor (or other things) out of, like the common 74-series logic.

Ah so you are also disagreeing with Wikichip: https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/bit-slice_microprocessor

 

[LightningDust]

Ah so you are also disagreeing with Wikichip: https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/bit-slice_microprocessor

Sure am. Calling a 4-bit adder with no fetch or decode logic a "microprocessor" is psychotic.

 

[Markfw]

The clear "lol intel sucks" tone combined with a total lack of apparent curiosity or knowledge of 70s micros. For the gods' sake, the Apple I and Apple II both predated this expensive thing, cost a few hundred bucks - and the Apple II sold many millions of units. Furthermore, calling the 29-series bitslice logic "processors" is a stretch - they were integrated logic blocks you could make a processor (or other things) out of, like the common 74-series logic.

Basically, bad history combined with a partisan desire to one-up Intel. Unimpressed. @dullard had the correct take.

At first I thought the 4051 was Motorola based and the 4052 was a dual Motorola setup. When I googled it is when I found it it was actually AMD based. Now maybe the fact that I worked at Tektronix at the time colored my view, and yes, we had apple also. But at the time the 4051/4052 was superior. It also has an 80287 math coprocessor AND a "matrix/math available processor" pack. It also was the machine that not only was used widely on display in the Battlestar Galactica set, but provided most if not all of the green "cool" graphics for display that we saw the cylons coming, etc and the ships displays.

All of this I had been impressed by since the show came out. From my perspective is was the first workable PC. Your take is the one that appears "colored"

 

[igor_kavinski]

Calling a 4-bit adder with no fetch or decode logic a "microprocessor" is psychotic.

Definitions evolve. It doesn't fit the definition of a modern microprocessor but at the time when it was released, it was considered a microprocessor.

AM2901 Datasheet(PDF)

Part #: AM2901. Download. File Size: 1MbKbytes. Page: 18 Pages. Description: FOUR-BIT BIPOLAR MICROPROCESSOR SLICE. Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices.

www.alldatasheet.com

Inside the Am2901: AMD's 1970s bit-slice processor

You're probably familiar with modern processors made by Advanced Micro Devices. But AMD's processors go back to 1975, when AMD introduced t...

www.righto.com

Lots of people have gone wayyy too long without their medication, maybe?

 

[LightningDust]

Definitions evolve. It doesn't fit the definition of a modern microprocessor but at the time when it was released, it was considered a microprocessor.

AM2901 Datasheet(PDF)

Part #: AM2901. Download. File Size: 1MbKbytes. Page: 18 Pages. Description: FOUR-BIT BIPOLAR MICROPROCESSOR SLICE. Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices.

www.alldatasheet.com

View attachment 123245

Inside the Am2901: AMD's 1970s bit-slice processor

You're probably familiar with modern processors made by Advanced Micro Devices. But AMD's processors go back to 1975, when AMD introduced t...

www.righto.com

View attachment 123246

Lots of people have gone wayyy too long without their medication, maybe?

"Microprocessor slice" is correct. "Microprocessor" is not. If a 4-bit adder is a microprocessor, so are the full adders that every comp-eng student makes as part of their first semester of digital logic design.

 

[igor_kavinski]

It also was the machine that not only was used widely on display in the Battlestar Galactica set, but provided most if not all of the green "cool" graphics for display that we saw the cylons coming, etc and the ships displays.

Great! So now we need a counter example of a PC that was shown on some show with graphics impressive for its time BEFORE the Tektronix machine.

 

[Markfw]

Great! So now we need a counter example of a PC that was shown on some show with graphics impressive for its time BEFORE the Tektronix machine.

Oh, and as for apple at the time, I worked for a mathematical statistician, and we did software that did (included) "multiple linear regression" and others, and processor power was crucial. The apple just didn't have it. The 4052 did, with the matrix pack. My view of computers and languages was tainted. I taught 405x language and the commodore software at a local community college outlet. These were the only ones widely used and on the college agenga in 1982. This is what colored this post, nothing else. And my research was using google and wiki. I don't know squat about microprocessor design in technical terms, I was a programmer. and went to school (college) we used a Honeywell 66 mainframe that had cards for input and output in the late 70's.

Example: I thought the IBM PC had an IBM processor. A few years later I worked on a IBM 360 mainframe, again, punch card input. But this one has paper output ! I never saw a screen to talk to a computer until sometime in the 2000's. (like 2001)

 

[igor_kavinski]

Seems the AMD philosophy has been the same since their inception. Provide solutions that others can't (or won't) provide.

 

[Markfw]

Battlestar Galactica bridge:

Note the 3 405x systems (plus more) on the picture at the top. First row of the main bridge They were all over the bridge. and used in the computer images, including the ships output.

 

[Mopetar]

So, not sure what started me down this path, but Tektronix has four AMD Am2901 4-bit bit-slice processors used together to make a single 16-bit processor.

So AMD going with chipsets for Zen was them just getting back to their roots?