AMD 9511, 9512, Intel 8231, 8232 wanted, will tradeNational MM57109

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Wed Jan 27 14:06:17 1999

You're absolutely correct . . . I actually got out my old AMD MOS
Microprocessors and Peripherals data book from 1985, and found that the
9511 is a stack oriented (like the HP calculators, I guess) arithmetic
processor capable of 16 and 32-bit floating point operations, while the
9512 is capable of 32 and 64-bit operations.

The 9511, it seems is capable of many more functions, being somewhat
reminiscent of a "scientific" calculator, while the 9512 is capable of none
of the transcendental functions which the 9511 supports. Both are
stack-oriented, therefore ideal for RPN implementation.

My steel-trap mind moves closer and closer every day to being a sievel . .
 oh, well . . . it's HELL getting old.

Dick

----------
> From: Gary Oliver <go_at_ao.com>
> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
> Subject: Re: AMD 9511, 9512, Intel 8231, 8232 wanted, will tradeNational
MM57109
> Date: Wednesday, January 27, 1999 12:36 PM
>
> >From my copy of "Floating Point Program Manual Am9511A/Am9512:"
>
> Am9511A Arithmetic Processor
>
> Distinctive Characteristics
> ---------------------------
> 2,3 and 4 MHz operation
> Fixed point 16 bit and 32 bit operations
> Floating point 32 bit operations
> Binary data formats
> Add, Subtract, Multiply and Divide
> Trigonometric and inverse trigonometric functions
> Square roots, logarithms, exponentiation
> Stack-oriented operand storage
> ...
>
> Am9512 Floating Point Processor
>
> Distinctive Characteristics
> ---------------------------
> Single (32-bit) and double (64-bit) precision capability
> Add, Subtract, Multiply and Divide
> Compatible with proposed IEEE format
> ...
>
>
> The 9511 is very much like a calculator with a 32 bit operand
> stack of up to four items. Operations work on the top or top
> two items on the stack. Some operands (such as PUPI "push PI")
> push a new item on the stack.
>
> At 4Mhz, a FADD takes (worst case) about 92 uSec and an FMUL
> (worst case) at 42 uSeconds. Wasn't too shabby when software
> took 5 to 10 times as long on a Z-80. Plus it was possible to
> get some other work done while the 9511 was off crunching a
> number or two.
>
> We still use the 9511 on an old (very old) legacy product, although
> they will eventually disappear - AMD is certainly not making them
> anymore and there are very few left on distributor shelves or even
> in "part surplus" houses.
>
> Gary
>
> At 10:18 AM 1/27/99 -0700, you wrote:
> >The 9511 was the floating point unit, and the 9512 was for 64-bit
integer
> >arithmetic, I believe. I've actually got one of each of these from back
in
> >the old days. They were sort of a calculator for your computer, in that
> >they could be operated faster than the cpu could perform the function .
 .
> >MUCH faster.
> >
> >Dick
> >
> >
> >----------
>
Received on Wed Jan 27 1999 - 14:06:17 GMT