An actual multiply instruction in 8bit?
Re: An actual multiply instruction in 8bit?
Actually, that's a great point: the 6809 was pretty close to a third-generation 8-bit CPU and it's got a lot more horsepower than the others.
- Harlequin
- Baaaaaaa!

- Posts: 6505
- Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2002 4:19 am 0
- Location: London, directly above the centre of the Earth.
Re: An actual multiply instruction in 8bit?
Was it not creeping into the area, though, of wobbly definitions of 8- and 16-bit?Dio wrote:Actually, that's a great point: the 6809 was pretty close to a third-generation 8-bit CPU and it's got a lot more horsepower than the others.
Emoticon and contraction free since... quite a while ago.
Re: An actual multiply instruction in 8bit?
Not really. 8-bit data bus, 8-bit ALU, mostly 8-bit register organisation internally.
- gilesgoat
- Sheepie Whore

- Posts: 27258
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:54 am 0
- Location: Monfalcone, Italy
- Contact:
Re: An actual multiply instruction in 8bit?
It is still "random logic" or does it already use some for of microcode/bit-slicer architecture ?Dio wrote:Actually, that's a great point: the 6809 was pretty close to a third-generation 8-bit CPU and it's got a lot more horsepower than the others.
I have some interesting OLD books about "Microprocessors Design via Bit-Slicers" .. you DIO SHOULD know "something" as it's all about those AM290X "bit slicer chips" that normally are "sequencers" and other things ..
Yeah I think 6809 was quite evolved, but I never worked on it.
Giles the billy goat
"Baa"
"Baa"
Re: An actual multiply instruction in 8bit?
Well, all the microprocessors used some sort of ROM to do the first round decode, which if you squint hard enough you might call microcode, but all the 8-bits used random logic sequencing as I understand it. A microcode sequencer is really big. The 68000 compressed theirs and it was still 3-4 times bigger than the entire ARM1 design.
The bit-slice thing was all about the early 70s minicomputers and mainframes. Until the mid-late 70s it wasn't regarded as possible to build a high capability single-chip 16-bit or larger computer (although frankly I think it probably was possible to manufacture an ARM1-class chip in 1975) so there were these various SSI 4-bit ALU chips and chips of 'registers' and the like that you used to build the larger machine. Ken Shirriff has a bunch of stuff on the Alto, which was very much that kind of design, if you want to dig deeper.
The bit-slice thing was all about the early 70s minicomputers and mainframes. Until the mid-late 70s it wasn't regarded as possible to build a high capability single-chip 16-bit or larger computer (although frankly I think it probably was possible to manufacture an ARM1-class chip in 1975) so there were these various SSI 4-bit ALU chips and chips of 'registers' and the like that you used to build the larger machine. Ken Shirriff has a bunch of stuff on the Alto, which was very much that kind of design, if you want to dig deeper.
Re: An actual multiply instruction in 8bit?
It did, didn't it? I was about to ask when I read that comment that none of the 8-bits had multiplication instructions. So that one did... But then it came really late in the game, the 68000 was already lurking the background when the 6809 came out.gravy wrote:6809 does have MUL of two 8-bit registers to a 16 bit result and takes 10/11 cycles.
Re: An actual multiply instruction in 8bit?
"massive retard™", "full of shit™", "tiny bitch™", "retarted™", "a bit of a one trick pony™", "petty™", "simple minded idealistic twat™", "miserable humourless fucker™"
