You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
The 80188 and 80186 have been the solid workhorse of many an embedded
product. Lately AMD pumped some more life into that CPU with it's
AM186EM processor - higher speed and fewer external parts. But that
does still not solve the limited address space issue. The tendency to
need more memory to perform a given task is to some extent also
present in the embedded world....
The question I ask is, what is the next solid workhorse going to be
for the Intel camp? I know the Motorola camp see different stuff here.
AMD did not release it's AM386EM as expected, and as I understand it,
won't do it at all. Intel have a part called 80386EX, but it seems a
little odd. PC compatible peripherals and a problem running out of
flash without extra buffers etc.
Anyone found a nice way to expand the address space of a plain 186
without placing too much burden on the software guys? Or is there some
other new processor I overlook?
- Rolf
Rolf V. Oestergaard unread, Dec 15, 1995, 9:00:00 AM12/15/95 You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
wa...@rbdc.rbdc.com(Wayne Farmer) wrote:
>Have you looked at the 80C196NU? 50 MHz internal (25 MHz external) 16-bit
>performance, with many on-chip peripherals. The 196 family is well-suited to
>control applications, and has a very clean register-to-register architecture.
Thanks for Your input.
The 196 family are high performance microcontrollers, not
microprocessors (I don't want to start a war over this). Code is not
compatible, which is the main idea of staying within the same family
of microprocessors.
I look for the next solid workhorse after 80186. I don't see 80196 as
a candidate.
- Rolf
John S. Fetzik unread, Dec 15, 1995, 9:00:00 AM12/15/95 You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
>Anyone found a nice way to expand the address space of a plain 186
>without placing too much burden on the software guys? Or is there some
>other new processor I overlook?
Have you looked at Nationals embedded 486 device? The Intel 386EX
isn't so bad. You don't have to use all of the built in peripherals.
If you want to expand your address space beyond 1 meg you can't use
186 code. If you stay in the x86 family you'll have to go to protected
mode. Thus there will be additional burden on the software guys, until
they get used to it. PM just requires more setup to get the additional
features.
John S. Fetzik
Chicago, IL
j...@wwa.com
http://miso.wwa.com/~jsf/
http://www.cage.org/
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
In article <
iKE0wMba...@login.dknet.dk>
ro...@login.dknet.dk(Rolf V. Oestergaard) writes:
>From:
ro...@login.dknet.dk(Rolf V. Oestergaard)
>Subject: What comes after 80186?
>Date: Thu, 14 Dec 1995 14:28:34 -0100
>The 80188 and 80186 have been the solid workhorse of many an embedded
>product. Lately AMD pumped some more life into that CPU with it's
>AM186EM processor - higher speed and fewer external parts. But that
>does still not solve the limited address space issue. The tendency to
>need more memory to perform a given task is to some extent also
>present in the embedded world....
>The question I ask is, what is the next solid workhorse going to be
>for the Intel camp? I know the Motorola camp see different stuff here.
>AMD did not release it's AM386EM as expected, and as I understand it,
>won't do it at all. Intel have a part called 80386EX, but it seems a
>little odd. PC compatible peripherals and a problem running out of
>flash without extra buffers etc.
>Anyone found a nice way to expand the address space of a plain 186
>without placing too much burden on the software guys? Or is there some
>other new processor I overlook?
>- Rolf
Have you looked at the 80C196NU? 50 MHz internal (25 MHz external) 16-bit
performance, with many on-chip peripherals. The 196 family is well-suited to
control applications, and has a very clean register-to-register architecture.
Check out http://www.intel.com.
+-----------------+-------------------+------------------------------+
| Wayne Farmer | Kernersville, | wayne @ rbdc.rbdc.com |
| | North Carolina | 72377.134 @ compuserve.com |
| "a thing of beauty | WayneOHere @ aol.com |
| is a joy forever" - Keats | |
+-------------------------------------+------------------------------+
"We have arrived at the megabyte millenium, using our sophisticated
worldwide communications system to talk dirty to strangers."
- Ellen Goodman, The Boston Globe
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
Try Intel's 80386 EX. It's highly integrated (similar to the
186), and software compatible with the x86 architecture.
Corwin Nichols unread, Dec 15, 1995, 9:00:00 AM12/15/95 You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
In article <
iKE0wMba...@login.dknet.dk>,
ro...@login.dknet.dksays...
>
>
>The 80188 and 80186 have been the solid workhorse of many an embedded
>product. Lately AMD pumped some more life into that CPU with it's
>AM186EM processor - higher speed and fewer external parts. But that
>does still not solve the limited address space issue. The tendency to
>need more memory to perform a given task is to some extent also
>present in the embedded world....
>
>The question I ask is, what is the next solid workhorse going to be
>for the Intel camp? I know the Motorola camp see different stuff here.
>AMD did not release it's AM386EM as expected, and as I understand it,
>won't do it at all. Intel have a part called 80386EX, but it seems a
>little odd. PC compatible peripherals and a problem running out of
>flash without extra buffers etc.
You might want to check out the 386EX a little more. The peripherals can
be run in PC compatible mode, but don't have to be. Also, they will be
releasing a new step of the part which removes the requirement for the
data buffer. This step should be in production in Q2, 96. I have built
a project using the 386EX using the current 'B' step and it works just
fine without the buffer. It is more expensive though at about $30 in
smallish quantities. I chose this part because of large address space,
and because I already had the development tools and familiarity with the
architecture. Since my company isn't planning to ship gazzillions of
these, the extra cost for the parts was traded for development time.
--
--------------
Corwin Nichols PP-ASEL, KE6DPI
cor...@microtech.com Mooney 6022Q
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
> >The 80188 and 80186 have been the solid workhorse of many an embedded
> >product. Lately AMD pumped some more life into that CPU with it's
> >AM186EM processor - higher speed and fewer external parts. But that
> >does still not solve the limited address space issue. The tendency to
> >need more memory to perform a given task is to some extent also
> >present in the embedded world....
...
>
> Have you looked at the 80C196NU? 50 MHz internal (25 MHz external) 16-bit
> performance, with many on-chip peripherals. The 196 family is well-suited to
> control applications, and has a very clean register-to-register architecture.
> Check out
http://www.intel.com.
>>>>
Unless Intel has made dramatic changes to the 196 line, I don't think this
chip is going to solve any address space problems.
AMD has stopped new development on the 29K line, ostensibly to concentrate on
the x86-compatible family. I expect to see some new embedded processors to
come from that effort. National is rumored to be coming out with a "486"
that rips out some of the less useful (for embedded developers) features
of that architecture - like real mode, floating point, virtual memory support,
and the internal cache. This leaves room for more useful things, like a 16550 UART,
an interrupt controller, DRAM and DMA controllers, counter/timers, PCMCIA
(or PC Card) and ISA controllers, an LCD interface, and a Access.bus interface.
Best of all, the chip is supposed to sell for $15 in quantity.
If the protected mode of the 386/486 is a bit too arcane for your taste, and you
like Intel, the 960 is a nice little chip that's easy to understand, and it has
a 4-gig address space. The i960 SA has a 16-bit external bus, built-in interrupt
controller, and claims 9.1 sustained VAX MIPS at 20 MHz. It comes in an 80-lead
QFP or an 84-lead PLCC, and uses between 1.2 and 1.7 Watts, depending on speed.
|==================================================================|
| Dave Hansen | B-Tree Verification Systems, Inc. |
| dha...@btree.com | 5929 Baker Rd, Suite 475 |
| (VOICE) 612-930-4112 | Minnetonka, MN 55345-5955 |
| (FAX) 612-936-2187 | |
|==================================================================|
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
In addition to the 386EX, there's a 386CX with less stuff on it if you don't
want all the PC peripherals. There is also a fully static core 386SX that comes
off the same line.
--
Ken Greenberg | It takes nine months to make a baby, no matter
| how many pregnant women are assigned to the task.
Los Gatos, CA | -Fred Brooks
Rolf V. Oestergaard unread, Dec 18, 1995, 9:00:00 AM12/18/95 You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
Bob Patterson and others wrote:
>Try Intel's 80386 EX. It's highly integrated (similar to the
>186), and software compatible with the x86 architecture.
I will check on the Intel 80386EX a little more, but even though many
of You recommended it, I did not hear anyone predicting it would take
over the job of the 80186 processor. The industry workhorse, that for
the last 7-8 years have been the main processor of choise for Intel
based embedded microprocessor projects. What's available today, that
will still be in widespread use in 7 years time?
Nobody said Intel 80386EX, did they?
- Rolf
Will Rose unread, Dec 18, 1995, 9:00:00 AM12/18/95 You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
John S. Fetzik unread, Dec 19, 1995, 9:00:00 AM12/19/95 You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
>I will check on the Intel 80386EX a little more, but even though many
>of You recommended it, I did not hear anyone predicting it would take
>over the job of the 80186 processor. The industry workhorse, that for
>the last 7-8 years have been the main processor of choise for Intel
>based embedded microprocessor projects. What's available today, that
>will still be in widespread use in 7 years time?
>
>Nobody said Intel 80386EX, did they?
In my opinion nothing will take over for the 80186 any time soon. It's
just too "good" for what it's used for. The main embedded uses are not
changing all that much in CPU requirements. There is a need for more
processing power, but it is usually very specific and ends up in
FPGA's or custon silicon because no affordable processor can do it.
Heck, in general last I heard it's still the z80 variants that sell
more units than any other processor. So from that point of view the
"workhorse" isn't event the 186.
If you are asking where the "big" end of the market such as laser
printers, network switch and routers, etc. are headed, then that's a
different question. Here you will see processors one or two
generations back from the desktop. By this I mean that some routers
and switches are basically high end 486 or low end Pentium machines,
Laser printers use 68040's, etc.
What it comes down to is the embedded market, and availible
processors, is so diverse now that there won't be any one processor
that will be the "workhorse". There will be all kinds of them and you
can choose what is appropriate for your purposes.
--
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
> In my opinion nothing will take over for the 80186 any time soon. It's
> just too "good" for what it's used for. The main embedded uses are not
> changing all that much in CPU requirements. There is a need for more
> processing power, but it is usually very specific and ends up in
> FPGA's or custon silicon because no affordable processor can do it.
>
The last pricing that I got (a couple of months back), the 386EX was 20c
cheaper than the 186EC. As an EC user, that's rather attractive if you're
running out of steam.
Of course, YMMV.
Steve.
Greg Holdren unread, Dec 23, 1995, 9:00:00 AM12/23/95 You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
John S. Fetzik (
j...@wwa.com) wrote:
: If you are asking where the "big" end of the market such as laser
: printers, network switch and routers, etc. are headed, then that's a
: different question. Here you will see processors one or two
: generations back from the desktop. By this I mean that some routers
: and switches are basically high end 486 or low end Pentium machines,
: Laser printers use 68040's, etc.
The Network and printer products I see use AMD 29k family and
Intel 80960 RISC based CPUs. Nothing to do with x86.
--
Greg Holdren
gr...@hprnd.rose.hp.com
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
What comes after 80186? 80187 of course. (couldn't resist)
--
Dave
/ The Think Tank \
[ (516)427-3775 ]
[_____ "Your Home/2"____]
[***********************]
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
In article <4bk0ge$
8...@linet02.li.net>,
... and 8052 followed 8051, 8049 followed 8048...
Actually Intel thinks that the 80386EX comes after the 80186. Time, however,
will actually tell. BTW, there is a mail list newsgroup associated with 386EX
development if anyone is interested.
D. Wendelboe
Penn Microsystems Inc
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
In article <4bp7kq$
to_...@primenet.primenet.com>,
dwend...@keiland.comsays...
> BTW, there is a mail list newsgroup associated with 386EX
>development if anyone is interested.
Yes, I am interested. Please post or reply with the address. Thanks.
Doug Wendelboe unread, Dec 27, 1995, 9:00:00 AM12/27/95 You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
In article <4bpejr$
2...@news2.aimnet.com>,
Send an email message to:
Place the following into the message section:
subscribe 386ex "your name" <your_email@address>
Replace "your name" with your real name. Replace "your_email@address"
with your actual Internet address. The list is a closed list, so you
will receive a notice when your name is added to the list.
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
gr...@hprnd.rose.hp.com(Greg Holdren) wrote:
>The Network and printer products I see use AMD 29k family and
>Intel 80960 RISC based CPUs. Nothing to do with x86.
Right, and notice that the AMD 29k is being discontinued!
Regards,
--------------
Rolf V. Oestergaard, T&T, Copenhagen, Denmark, M.Sc.EE \ /\ /
e-mail: ro...@login.dknet.dk \/ \/
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
:
gr...@hprnd.rose.hp.com(Greg Holdren) wrote:
: >The Network and printer products I see use AMD 29k family and
: >Intel 80960 RISC based CPUs. Nothing to do with x86.
: Right, and notice that the AMD 29k is being discontinued!
The AMD 2900 maybe as its been used for years and there are newer
29k family devices out now. Surely you dont mean the whole 29k line?
--
Greg Holdren
gr...@hprnd.rose.hp.com
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
: Right, and notice that the AMD 29k is being discontinued!
The AMD 2900 maybe as its been used for years and there are newer
29k family devices out now. Surely you dont mean the whole 29k line?
AMD announced that they were discontinuing future development of the 29k
line. (in favor of the intel compatible line.) While this is not nearly so
drastic as discontinuing the product line itself, it doesn't bode well. On
the other hand, perhaps the shakeout in the PC industry (witness Cirrus)
will change their minds...
BillW
Byron Lunz unread, Jan 1, 1996, 9:00:00 AM1/1/96 You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
Doug Wendelboe (
dwend...@keiland.com) got it almost right when he wrote:
: Send an email message to:
: Majo...@teleport.com
: Place the following into the message section:
: subscribe 386ex "your name" <your_email@address>
Don't include your name or your address, *IF* you want to subscribe the
same address that you're mailing from. All you need in the message body
in that case is "subscribe 386ex".
If you want or need to subscribe a different address, then include that
following "subscribe 386ex" as Doug suggests (but not your name and no
brackets around the address).
: Replace "your name" with your real name. Replace "your_email@address"
: with your actual Internet address. The list is a closed list, so you
: will receive a notice when your name is added to the list.
Actually it's not a closed list, but if the subscribe address is
different from the sender's address, the request must be approved per
standard majordomo operation.
To just find out more about this list, you can check the web page at
http://www.microtekintl.com/386ex.htm
--
Byron Lunz
byr...@teleport.com
owner...@teleport.com
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
gr...@hprnd.rose.hp.com(Greg Holdren) wrote:
>: Right, and notice that the AMD 29k is being discontinued!
>The AMD 2900 maybe as its been used for years and there are newer
>29k family devices out now. Surely you dont mean the whole 29k line?
Sorry, I meant future development of the 29k products. Existing
products will be continued, AFAIK. But I guess that will reduce the
number of new 29k designs dramatically.
- Rolf
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4