• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

POLL: Pick your favorite 8-bit Microprocessor!

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Iron Woode
Originally posted by: FrustratedUser
8510 owns.

It was the 6502 version used in the C128. Cabable of running 2MHz insread of 1. Aaah remember software overclocking my C128 to run faster than 1MHz despite the video chip.
Set clock speed to 2MHz when screen was drawn and then clock down to 1 MHz just before the next screen. Mmmmm raster interupt at adress x314.
Click to expand...
If you are programming in BASIC, you just used the FAST command to enable 2mghz. It really sped things up.

Normal C64 ran at 1mghz (more or less) VIC20 ran a little faster.
Click to expand...

Yes I know the FAST command but the VIC (video chip) did not work at higher speed than 1MHz so I switched the clock to 2MHz during the time the screen was not updated.

I like your unit.
1 milli gigahertz = 1MHz

 
Originally posted by: FrustratedUser
Originally posted by: Iron Woode
Originally posted by: FrustratedUser
8510 owns.

It was the 6502 version used in the C128. Cabable of running 2MHz insread of 1. Aaah remember software overclocking my C128 to run faster than 1MHz despite the video chip.
Set clock speed to 2MHz when screen was drawn and then clock down to 1 MHz just before the next screen. Mmmmm raster interupt at adress x314.
Click to expand...
If you are programming in BASIC, you just used the FAST command to enable 2mghz. It really sped things up.

Normal C64 ran at 1mghz (more or less) VIC20 ran a little faster.
Click to expand...

Yes I know the FAST command but the VIC (video chip) did not work at higher speed than 1MHz so I switched the clock to 2MHz during the time the screen was not updated.

I like your unit.
1 milli gigahertz = 1MHz
Click to expand...
What if he meant megagigahertz?

Now THAT'S real ultimate power!
 
Originally posted by: ViRGE
Ugg, it's a hard choice. The Moto 68K brought us the Mac, the TI-89/92, and later on the Palm Pilot, but the Z80 brought us TI-82/83 calculators, and the Game Boy. In the end, I had to go with the 68K.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly, Still use my 92 nearly every day so that was the deciding factor for me.
 
6502 all the way cause that's what the NES used. 🙂 Runner up would be IMO the Z80 since it was seemingly in everything.
 
Originally posted by: Colt45
what did nintendo use? 😀
Click to expand...

Nintendo used a 6502. So did the Atari, Apple II, Commodore 64 and a bunch of other systems.

edit: Meh. Question already answered! Needed to read second page of the thread.
 
The 8088 shared eight lines of the address and data bus - it wasn't "crippled" per se, the idea was to allow smaller mobos (fewer traces / paths). It was a multiplexed bus ...but still had 16 bit paths (there was just a small delay as the muxed line changed function).

Z80s were more popular because they were easier to program (better native instruction set) and more efficient. The register scheme was better too. It was 8080 compatible (8080 binary would run without alteration).

Microsoft used to make a Z80 card for Apple IIs. It allowed you to use CP/M - a real OS - instead of patched up BASIC (patched up to allow Floppy access). It came with Microsoft BASIC (5.0 I, think) which had better graphics and common programming structures like "While..DO" and "DO UNTIL" (pretty hot stuff for the time).

The 8085 was a pretty decent processor too ...

FWIW

Scott
 
Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Where "celeron" crippling covers all eras from p2 to p4. Best-crippled were the 266 and 300 non-"a" with 0K cache, slower than p1.
Click to expand...

And that's where the Celery name came from. Ironic though that the 300a with 128k onchip cache, was an overclocking monster with most doing 450 at default voltage.

My first computer was a Commodore Vic 20. Had a Rockwell 6502 processor running at 1 whole megahertz iirc.
Actually outran it's 5k memory with a basic program. Had to convince my mother to buy me a 16k memory cartridge.
 
Originally posted by: JC

Well, to be fair, the 386SX wasn't a crippled 386DX...the copro was separate in those days 🙂 AIR....
Click to expand...

The 386SX was a crippled 386DX. Neither had a built in math coprocessor, but the 386DX was 32 bits all the way through, while the 386SX was 32 bits internally and 16 bits externally, much in the same way that the 8088 was 16 bits internally and 8 bits externally.

The 386sx is to the 386dx as the 8088 is to the 8086.


PS- back in the day I was all Intel. I spent a lot of money on an Intel 386DX 33mhz and I kind of mocked my friend who bought a Cyrix 386. His ran at 40 mhz and handily beat my PC on every benchmark we tested, including games.
 
I can't believe that nobody here mentioned the NEC V20!

It was basically a 8088 made by NEC, and it was faster than Intel's part. You could just drop it in and get more performance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top