On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Doug Yowza wrote:
> If the F14 computer was really as cheap as you say, then you're right.
> I'm sure Intel had a gate budget and a price point they were shooting for,
> so if those two parameters are similar for both designs, you've got a
> point. Otherwise, you can't judge the "technical significance" of the
> 4004 by comparing it to, say, a special purpose computer with different
> design goals and silicon budgets.
The CADC was not special purpose. It could be programmed to do all sorts
of stuff, just like the 4004 was. The design goal from the onset was to
make it general purpose so that the design could be re-used in all sorts
of aerospace projects. This is explained in many of Holt's papers on the
design. He also talked about during his VCF presentation.
> So, what was the gate count for the single-chip F14 CPU? What was the
> process? How much silicon did it use? And double-check that price!
http://www.microcomputerhistory.com has all these answers and more.
Sam Alternate e-mail: dastar_at_siconic.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever onward.
Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0
See
http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 09/21/98]
Received on Fri Oct 09 1998 - 13:43:09 BST