Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Dan3 who wrote (98345)	3/13/2000 9:23:00 PM
From: brushwud	Read Replies (1) of 1580754

The 8080 was fine start, but the Z80a, with 50% higher clock speed and twice as many instructions just blew it away in terms of performance. Intel held on to some of the low end business with it's 8085 because the 8085 integrated some functions that were offboard on other chips. As I recall, the Z80 was twice as fast. Also both the Z80 & 8085 required only a 5V supply, whereas the 8080 needed +12V and -5V as well. Moving on to the 16 bit generation, everyone expected the Z8000 to dominate, although Motorola had an excellent chip in the 68000 and was a real competitor, the 8086/8088 was barely an also ran... The Intel devices were on the market about a half a generation ahead of all of the other 16-bit chips. The others had nicer architectures, but the 8086/8088 was far ahead in terms of availability.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next