dseah@wpi.wpi.edu (David I Seah) (05/16/89)
With the recent discussion about the "6503"... Peeking into my ancient Jameco catalog, we have 6504s, 6507s, and 6512s, processors all! There are 6522 versatile interface adapters (used by the Mockingboard, I think, to generate interrupts and provide programmable registers), 6526 Complex interface adapter, tri port interfaces, 6532 128x8(bit?)RAM, a CRT controller, video interface chips for NTSC and PAL, communication chips and Sound Interface chips! Are there such support chips for the 65816? Are the chips listed above horribly outdated in functionality? What is the Complex interface adapter? Dave Seah (dseah@wpi.wpi.edu, dseah@wpi.bitnet); "This isn't suppose to happen..."
brianw@microsoft.UUCP (Brian Willoughby) (05/19/89)
In article <2304@wpi.wpi.edu> dseah@wpi.wpi.edu (David I Seah) writes: ... >Peeking into my ancient Jameco catalog, we have 6504s, 6507s, and 6512s, >processors all! There are 6522 versatile interface adapters ... > >Are there such support chips for the 65816? Are the chips listed above >horribly outdated in functionality? What is the Complex interface adapter? > >Dave Seah (dseah@wpi.wpi.edu, dseah@wpi.bitnet); Most of the JameCo catalog chips are Commodore surplus. JameCo used to have a section for Commodore chips, but now they're listing them in with the "real" 6500 series chips. The 6502 was designed to be 6800 bus compatible, so I think that's why there aren't more support chips out there. I'd like to know if Commodore actually designed and manufactured those 65xx chips. I made the above assumptions because I haven't seen the chips anywhere else. BTW, NCR has several 6500/ microcomputers and so does Rockwell. (I don't know who came first, but most are compatible between manufacturers - i.e. plug-in replacements) These companies have a few support chips, but nothing fancy, because the microcomputer chips they offer have RAM, ROM, parallel and serial built in. Speaking of fancy support chips, the 65816 really NEEDS some. Imagine a 65000 Cache Controller, or even a 65000 Virtual Memory Controller! I could really use an 8 channel 65000 DMA Controller! The 65816 has ABORT interrupts and other features to support virtual memory, and the single cycle memory access makes it easy to design low parts count interfaces for a variety of speeds of memory. What we need is an Apple IIGSS, for Graphics, Sound AND Speed. In it could be 32K Static RAMS and several channels of peripheral DMA, if only the support chips were provided by the Western Design Center (or Apple's custom chip factory!)! These fanciful ramblings brought to you by Brian Willoughby, ...!uw-beaver!microsoft!brianw brianw@microsoft.UUCP
rkh@mtune.ATT.COM (Robert Halloran) (05/19/89)
In article <5754@microsoft.UUCP> brianw@microsoft.UUCP (Brian Willoughby) writes: >I'd like to know if Commodore actually designed and manufactured those >65xx chips. I made the above assumptions because I haven't seen the >chips anywhere else. BTW, NCR has several 6500/ microcomputers and so >does Rockwell. (I don't know who came first, but most are compatible >between manufacturers - i.e. plug-in replacements) These companies have >a few support chips, but nothing fancy, because the microcomputer chips >they offer have RAM, ROM, parallel and serial built in. As I recall, the 6502 was designed at MOS Technology (anyone out there still remember the venerable KIM-1? Thought not :-)). They were bought out by Commodore, and I believe most of the chips like the VIA, etc., were designed after that point. Anyone down in KingOfPrussia in a position to comment? Bob Halloran ========================================================================= UUCP: att!mtune!rkh Internet: rkh@mtune.ATT.COM USPS: 17 Lakeland Dr, Port Monmouth NJ 07758 DDD: 201-495-6621 eve ET Disclaimer: If you think AT&T would have ME as a spokesman, you're crazed. Quote: "Well, if it wasn't Buckaroo Banzai, I'd say 'commit the man.'" - where else?
paul@athertn.Atherton.COM (Paul Sander) (05/21/89)
In article <7994@mtune.ATT.COM>, rkh@mtune.ATT.COM (Robert Halloran) writes: > In article <5754@microsoft.UUCP> brianw@microsoft.UUCP (Brian Willoughby) writes: > >I'd like to know if Commodore actually designed and manufactured those > >65xx chips. I made the above assumptions because I haven't seen the > >chips anywhere else. > > [stuff omitted] > > As I recall, the 6502 was designed at MOS Technology (anyone out there > still remember the venerable KIM-1? You mean MOS' single-board computer with a calculator keypad and LEDs for a display? Oh yeah! How the SYM-1, which Synertek made? > Thought not :-)). They were bought > out by Commodore, and I believe most of the chips like the VIA, etc., were > designed after that point. The old 6501 was designed to be plug-in compatible with the 6800, except that it has the new instruction set. I appears to have been quickly abandoned, because I never saw them available, even in 1978 when the 6502 was common. During that time, Synertek had a technology exchange agreement with MOS (which was owned by Commodore) and the nifty chips were apparently designed during the lifetime of this agreement. These nifty chips included the 6522 VIA, the 6545 CRTC, and 6551 ACIA, and a number of RAM/ROM/Timer/everything- under-the-sun chips. -- Paul Sander (408) 734-9822 | Do YOU get nervous when a paul@Atherton.COM | sys{op,adm,prg,engr} says {decwrl,sun,hplabs!hpda}!athertn!paul | "oops..." ?
V131Q5CG@UBVMSC.CC.BUFFALO.EDU (John Taylor) (05/24/89)
From: IN%"INFO-APP@NDSUVM1.BITNET" Date: 22-MAY-1989 22:35:43 Description: Re: 6502 support chips Received: from ubvm.BITNET by UBVMS.BITNET; Mon, 22 May 89 22:33 EDT Received: by UBVM (Mailer R2.03B) id 0973; Mon, 22 May 89 22:35:21 EDT Date: Sat, 20 May 89 23:29:10 GMT From: Paul Sander <nsc!pyramid!athertn!paul@DECWRL.DEC.COM> Subject: Re: 6502 support chips Sender: INFO-APP Info-Apple List <INFO-APP@NDSUVM1.BITNET> To: "(no name)" <INFOAPPL@UBVMS.BITNET> Reply-to: Info-Apple@BRL.MIL Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was info-apple-request@BRL.MIL Comments: To: info-apple@BRL.MIL >In article <7994@mtune.ATT.COM>, rkh@mtune.ATT.COM (Robert Halloran) writes: >> [...] > As I recall, the 6502 was designed at MOS Technology (anyone out there > still remember the venerable KIM-1? [...] The 6502 was designed at MOS Technology (MOSTEK now, I believe) and manufactured by MOS, Synertek, and Rockwell; model #'s MCS6502/SY6502, according to my "Apple ][ Reference Manual". ------------- John Taylor -- State University of New York at Buffalo Bitnet : v131q5cg@ubvmsc Internet: v131q5cg@ubvmsc.cc.buffalo.edu
paul@athertn.Atherton.COM (Paul Sander) (05/25/89)
In article <8905231349.aa06105@SMOKE.BRL.MIL>, V131Q5CG@UBVMSC.CC.BUFFALO.EDU (John Taylor) writes: > The 6502 was designed at MOS Technology (MOSTEK now, I believe) and > manufactured by MOS, Synertek, and Rockwell; [more info omitted > John Taylor -- State University of New York at Buffalo MOS Technology and MOSTEK are not, and never have been the same. MOS Technology was owned by Commodore, and was based in New England somewhere, I believe. MOSTEK was a different semiconductor manufacturer based in Texas. One of MOSTEK's notable contributions was their early second sourcing of Zilog devices. -- Paul Sander (408) 734-9822 | Do YOU get nervous when a paul@Atherton.COM | sys{op,adm,prg,engr} says {decwrl,sun,pyramid}!athertn!paul | "oops..." ?