8 ms·

That's like when Intel switched to SECC (single edge card connector) with Pentium2/Pentium3 and stuck it on an Atari(NES?)-like catridge: this was to thwart clo

That's like when Intel switched to SECC (single edge card connector) with Pentium2/Pentium3 and stuck it on an Atari(NES?)-like catridge: this was to thwart clones and outstanding cross-licensing with AMD. What a weird decision. I'm not even sure if it worked tactically because it only lasted until Pentium 4. Weird days.

xattt 5y ago
The side connector lasted until Socket 370 in the Pentium III product cycle. The new socket took Pentium III chips that had integrated L2 cache (versus earlier PIIIs which had cache on an external chip). Pentium 4 never had a side connector model, but did have a “socket shrink” in the transition from Willamette (0.18 u) to Northwood (0.13 u) cores. Socket 478 was kept until the Prescott cores (0.09 u). The Prescott cores were also offered with an LGA 775 socket later.
- AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  Wow. Transistor sizes measured in um instead of nm. That takes me back...
- SavantIdiot 5y ago
  Yup, that's why I said "until Pentium4". P6.0/P6S actually introduced multi-die packages at Intel, not the SECC. Well, actually that's not true either, because I worked on Sidewinder: a 486 that fit in a 386 socket with an ASIC on the top of the package that matched the busses. So it was technically "multi-die".
meepmorp 5y ago
Slot 1, or slot 2 for Xeons. AMD had slot A for a hot second in the early Athlon days, before they went back to a PGA. It's weird, yeah, but is it worse than aligning an expensive bunch of easily bent metal pins into a grid of small holes?
- timw4mail 5y ago
  In terms of usable data/electrical connections, the slot is worse. This could mean you have to use multiple clock cycles to send the same data, due to fewer direct connections.
to11mtm 5y ago
I think the SECC1 design was more based on practicality of cache that was available at the time; While the connector was 'proprietary,' the Bus design itself was probably a more protect-able part of locking AMD out. FWIW AMD's original Athlon used a Slot connector as well, for similar reasons.
- timw4mail 5y ago
  Intel and AMD actually used the same physical connector, with the slot keys on the connector opposite for AMD than Intel.

xattt 5y ago

The side connector lasted until Socket 370 in the Pentium III product cycle. The new socket took Pentium III chips that had integrated L2 cache (versus earlier PIIIs which had cache on an external chip). Pentium 4 never had a side connector model, but did have a “socket shrink” in the transition from Willamette (0.18 u) to Northwood (0.13 u) cores. Socket 478 was kept until the Prescott cores (0.09 u). The Prescott cores were also offered with an LGA 775 socket later.

AnimalMuppet 5y ago
Wow. Transistor sizes measured in um instead of nm. That takes me back...
SavantIdiot 5y ago
Yup, that's why I said "until Pentium4". P6.0/P6S actually introduced multi-die packages at Intel, not the SECC. Well, actually that's not true either, because I worked on Sidewinder: a 486 that fit in a 386 socket with an ASIC on the top of the package that matched the busses. So it was technically "multi-die".

meepmorp 5y ago

Slot 1, or slot 2 for Xeons. AMD had slot A for a hot second in the early Athlon days, before they went back to a PGA. It's weird, yeah, but is it worse than aligning an expensive bunch of easily bent metal pins into a grid of small holes?

timw4mail 5y ago
In terms of usable data/electrical connections, the slot is worse. This could mean you have to use multiple clock cycles to send the same data, due to fewer direct connections.

to11mtm 5y ago

I think the SECC1 design was more based on practicality of cache that was available at the time; While the connector was 'proprietary,' the Bus design itself was probably a more protect-able part of locking AMD out. FWIW AMD's original Athlon used a Slot connector as well, for similar reasons.

timw4mail 5y ago
Intel and AMD actually used the same physical connector, with the slot keys on the connector opposite for AMD than Intel.