8080 vs. 8080A

From: ajp166 <ajp166_at_bellatlantic.net>
Date: Sun Sep 30 15:31:50 2001


The I8080A is AS fast as the i8080. the i8080A-1 is faster but not twice
as the fastest 8080[A] was only 3mhz and hte standard part was 2mhz.


-----Original Message-----
From: John Galt <gmphillips_at_earthlink.net>
To: classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Date: Sunday, September 30, 2001 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: 8080 vs. 8080A

>"The i8080A is essentially twice as fast as the
> standard i8080 and COULD be used more easily with low-power logic since
>demands aren't as stringent".
>Ok, that's a good start.
>But, I don't think "low power" TTL (transistor transistor logic) had
>anything to do with the complexity of the code being executed on the
>True? I had assumed
>that the references to the 8080 only being compatible
>with "low-power TTL" and the 8080A being compatible
>with "standard TTL" had something to do with the support chips (Ram,
>etc) that could be used with the 8080 vs. the 8080A.
>Since I'm new to this mail list, let me explain why I would
>show up here and ask such a question to begin with.
>I'm a chip collector. I am trying to document the differences between
>different early Intel microprocessors. Not worried about massive
>just the major differences (PMOS, vs. NMOS, vs.
>HMOS, clock speed, transistor count, etc).
>The only microprocessor that I don't have a good handle
>on is the 8080 and the difference between the 8080 and 8080A.
>I also know that the 8080 was introduced sometime
>around April 1974. I have not been able to find an
>introduction date for the 8080A. Was it introduced at
>the same time? Does anyone know?
>I also need an Intel C8080 or C8080-8 for my
>collection. If you have one, I want it. I have been looking
>for one for months and have not been able to find one.
>If you have either of these chips in good condition
>(no desoldered parts wanted), I'm offering 400.00
>for the C8080-8 and 500.00 for a C8080.
>If you need a replacement for the C8080 or C8080-8 you sell me, I'll
>you a D8080A free as part of the
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Richard Erlacher" <edick_at_idcomm.com>
>To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
>Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 1:21 PM
>Subject: Re: 8080 vs. 8080A
>> This makes no sense at all, though it may be because I'm
>the way
>> in which you've put it.
>> I have Intel boards that come in versions with the i8080 and also,
>> optionally,with the i8080A, and, aside from the clock frequency and
>> access times, they're identical. The i8080A is essentially twice as
>as the
>> standard i8080 and COULD be used more easily with low-power logic
>> demands aren't as stringent.
>> The i8080A will, AFAIK, replace the i8080 in all applications without
>> effects.
>> BTW, please turn off "rich-text" mode in your email editor when you
>> messages for this group, as some folks' mail readers can't interpret
>> rich-text/HTML format.
>> Dick
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: John Galt
>> To: classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org
>> Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 10:17 AM
>> Subject: 8080 vs. 8080A
>> Can anyone here describe the technical differences between
>> an Intel 8080 and Intel 8080A CPU?
>> The ONLY ref. I have been able to find seems to indicate that there
was a
>bug in
>> the 8080 and as a result it would only work with low power TTL?
>> The problem was fixed in the 8080A and it would work with standard
>> Does this make sense to anyone?
>> Could anyone put this into laymans terms for me?
>> Thanks,
>> George Phillips - gmphillips_at_earthlink.net
Received on Sun Sep 30 2001 - 15:31:50 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:34:26 BST