6 ms·

The x86 world certainly had a lot of interesting outliers that other architectures, like m68k, never did. Sometimes I wonder how a 100 MHz m68030 with tons of c

The x86 world certainly had a lot of interesting outliers that other architectures, like m68k, never did. Sometimes I wonder how a 100 MHz m68030 with tons of cache would compare with an '040 or '060... The Blue Lightning supports 80486 instructions, so it can run modern NetBSD. That'd make for some interesting observations.

sitzkrieg 3y ago
very true, i also wonder if in some weird twist of fate some outlier like cyrix became the dominant x86 manufacturer and designers or something wack like that
userbinator 3y ago
IBM choosing x86 for the PC meant that development focused there, and back then it seemed IP/patents was less of an issue than it is today, so there was a lot more competition. There was at one time over a dozen independently designed x86 cores available as purchasable products: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_x86_manufacturers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_x86_manufacturers
- WarOnPrivacy 3y ago
  > IP/patents was less of an issue than it is today, so there was a lot more competition. There's a powerful lesson in here somewhere.
  - scns 3y ago
    Remy Martin are, per decree from 1936, the only distillery making Cognac in the Champagne. Good aroma but way to sharp for 40% alcohol for my taste. Zero Competition.
  - numpad0 3y ago
    Yes. My interpretation is there had been a problem of population and economic growth on Earth: The world population had doubled by 2020 from 1980, while US population grew only 1.5x. US GDP had grown 10x, world 3x. So the world had shrank at least 1/2, and the US both had to earn more influence and had gained more leverages during these years. It would not be surprising if seemingly overly litigious and possessive culture both in the US and world at large were mere symptoms, than cause. It's time to, either have a global thermonuclear war for a proud rewind(please no, I could be sitting far enough to die liquefying over weeks when suns appear over), or to boldly go where no one has gone before.
  - scarface_74 3y ago
    Not really. Intel licensed the x86 architecture
    - WarOnPrivacy 3y ago
      IP in more hands and not locked away is the thing that led to more competition. In regards to advancing competition, licensing's role was to be an obstacle that needed overcoming.
- jpollock 3y ago
  They weren't any less litigious, Intel sold licenses to the x86 architecture. There were several fabs that had licenses, and there were lawsuits around whether or not they were transferable. https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/intel-and-the-x86-architecture-a-legal-perspective https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/intel-and-the-x86-archit...
- formerly_proven 3y ago
  > back then it seemed IP/patents was less of an issue than it is today, so there was a lot more competition Maybe it was rather because IBM required second sources, so Intel wouldn't have gotten the x86 win without licensing it to other manufacturers.
  - bombcar 3y ago
    It was also surprisingly easy [1] to switch entire CPU architectures back in the "olden days" and it wasn't a given that x86 would even be a long-term architecture the way it ended up. [1] for a value of easy that was something between "we made all the software and so recompiling on a new processor isn't customer painful" to "the thing is programmed entirely manually anyway so who cares".
  - flenserboy 3y ago
    I'd be curious to see the timeline where IBM went with the 68000 instead, with a similar resulting proliferation of chipmakers and chips. Making Motorola compete, as well as having to push the envelope, could have led to some special designs.
anthk 3y ago
Well, a 486 with an FPU @70mhz would stomp it.
shrubble 3y ago
The 40MHz 68040 would be a good one to use for comparison. This chip had block move instructions as did the 486 which greatly increases performance. Supposedly Motorola felt uncomfortable putting a heat sink on the CPU and thus they didn't increase the clock speed further...
mysterydip 3y ago
I know it wouldn't be a 1:1 comparison with an actul chip, but could this be done on an FPGA?
LargoLasskhyfv 3y ago
http://apollo-core.com http://apollo-core.com running on not so fast and large FPGAs should give an impression. Now imagine that as ASIC on modern process nodes, coupled with HBM.

sitzkrieg 3y ago

very true, i also wonder if in some weird twist of fate some outlier like cyrix became the dominant x86 manufacturer and designers or something wack like that

userbinator 3y ago

IBM choosing x86 for the PC meant that development focused there, and back then it seemed IP/patents was less of an issue than it is today, so there was a lot more competition. There was at one time over a dozen independently designed x86 cores available as purchasable products: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_x86_manufacturers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_x86_manufacturers

WarOnPrivacy 3y ago
> IP/patents was less of an issue than it is today, so there was a lot more competition. There's a powerful lesson in here somewhere.
- scns 3y ago
  Remy Martin are, per decree from 1936, the only distillery making Cognac in the Champagne. Good aroma but way to sharp for 40% alcohol for my taste. Zero Competition.
- numpad0 3y ago
  Yes. My interpretation is there had been a problem of population and economic growth on Earth: The world population had doubled by 2020 from 1980, while US population grew only 1.5x. US GDP had grown 10x, world 3x. So the world had shrank at least 1/2, and the US both had to earn more influence and had gained more leverages during these years. It would not be surprising if seemingly overly litigious and possessive culture both in the US and world at large were mere symptoms, than cause. It's time to, either have a global thermonuclear war for a proud rewind(please no, I could be sitting far enough to die liquefying over weeks when suns appear over), or to boldly go where no one has gone before.
- scarface_74 3y ago
  Not really. Intel licensed the x86 architecture
  - WarOnPrivacy 3y ago
    IP in more hands and not locked away is the thing that led to more competition. In regards to advancing competition, licensing's role was to be an obstacle that needed overcoming.
jpollock 3y ago
They weren't any less litigious, Intel sold licenses to the x86 architecture. There were several fabs that had licenses, and there were lawsuits around whether or not they were transferable. https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/intel-and-the-x86-architecture-a-legal-perspective https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/intel-and-the-x86-archit...
formerly_proven 3y ago
> back then it seemed IP/patents was less of an issue than it is today, so there was a lot more competition Maybe it was rather because IBM required second sources, so Intel wouldn't have gotten the x86 win without licensing it to other manufacturers.
- bombcar 3y ago
  It was also surprisingly easy [1] to switch entire CPU architectures back in the "olden days" and it wasn't a given that x86 would even be a long-term architecture the way it ended up. [1] for a value of easy that was something between "we made all the software and so recompiling on a new processor isn't customer painful" to "the thing is programmed entirely manually anyway so who cares".
- flenserboy 3y ago
  I'd be curious to see the timeline where IBM went with the 68000 instead, with a similar resulting proliferation of chipmakers and chips. Making Motorola compete, as well as having to push the envelope, could have led to some special designs.

anthk 3y ago

Well, a 486 with an FPU @70mhz would stomp it.

shrubble 3y ago

The 40MHz 68040 would be a good one to use for comparison. This chip had block move instructions as did the 486 which greatly increases performance. Supposedly Motorola felt uncomfortable putting a heat sink on the CPU and thus they didn't increase the clock speed further...

mysterydip 3y ago

I know it wouldn't be a 1:1 comparison with an actul chip, but could this be done on an FPGA?

LargoLasskhyfv 3y ago

http://apollo-core.com http://apollo-core.com running on not so fast and large FPGAs should give an impression. Now imagine that as ASIC on modern process nodes, coupled with HBM.