

Collection of Intel 8080 microprocessors - begoon
http://demin.ws/blog/english/2012/12/24/my-i8080-collection/

======
drallison
You do not include the 8085, Intel's response to the Z80, with some new
instructions some of which were not documented. There was, I believe, a period
of several months shortly after the 8085 introduction when the 8080 parts
shipped by Intel were actually made by Texas Instrument since Intel had lost
the 8080 process.

------
gingerlime
Having very little knowledge about processors and chips, I particularly
enjoyed the last bit where you say

 _This is how I took pictures of all these chips in a quite technological way
using one iPhone and two Raspberry Pi_

very funny

~~~
begoon
Well, I was experimenting for while with light to avoid shadows, and that
setup was the best I could build that dark night ;-)

------
rwmj
I'm surprised there are no Zilog (Z80) chips in this collection. They were an
8080 clone, massively popular, with a very useful set of extended instructions
including block copies and an extended register set.

~~~
begoon
Zilog is a different story. I love them as well, but i8080 is quite
exceptional to me personally. Somehow it still remember almost all machine
codes of this CPU and can program even without the assembler ;-). I know, Z80
is a derivative from i8080 compatible in most of instructions, so maybe
another collection.

~~~
rwmj
It's a great collection.

What I really liked about the Z80 was the sane and regular assembler syntax. I
know that's not a feature of the Z80 per-se, but when Zilog had copyright
problems with the Intel assembler, I think they went one better.

    
    
        ld a,(hl)
    

load accumulator from the address pointed to by the hl register pair

The equivalent 8080 was:

    
    
        mov a,m
    

where you had to know that 'm' was really the h & l registers paired plus
indirected. The Intel syntax was very irregular, eg. "mvi" was move an
immediate value into a register, "stax" was store (something? I forget
exactly). "lxi" was load immediate(?) into a register pair?

The Zilog syntax used "ld" for all of them.

The only better assembler I've used was the 68000.

Edit: Found a good Intel<->Zilog translation here:
[http://nemesis.lonestar.org/computers/tandy/software/apps/m4...](http://nemesis.lonestar.org/computers/tandy/software/apps/m4/qd/opcodes.txt)
Wow, Intel _really_ was ugly.

------
pattern
I love seeing how other people express and communicate the things they are
passionate about. I fully support people geeking out about whatever they
please, as long as it makes them happy :)

------
ddrmaxgt37
do any of you have the real story on AMD's 8080 clone?

~~~
arkonaut
also really interested in this ^^.

~~~
begoon
The link above is exactly what I read. Very interesting.

------
whiskers
I love that you staged the photos by propping a phone on top of two Pibows,
I'm one of the guys who makes those in Sheffield, UK :)

------
sublimit
That was a particularly uninteresting collection of identical-looking things.

~~~
enraged_camel
Perhaps if you find it uninteresting you should refrain from commenting? Just
a friendly suggestion. I mean, what value are you adding by saying you find it
uninteresting?

What makes your comment particularly annoying is that it is obvious you
haven't even read the short article that accompany the pictures. It states two
things:

"Testing revealed that all processors are identical according to the CPU
Exerciser except clones from AMD."

"Interestingly, AMD i8080-compatible chips were reverse-engineered from
schematics literally stolen from Intel."

In other words, they are identical, which is why they look identical. DUH!

~~~
sublimit
Now now, I'm surprised my light-hearted post caused such a backlash.

>Perhaps if you find it uninteresting you should refrain from commenting? Just
a friendly suggestion. I mean, what value are you adding by saying you find it
uninteresting?

For one, I can't downvote, so this is the only way I could express my
disapproval. And different opinions are valuable in themselves, as you can't
have rational, democratic discourse without them.

>In other words, they are identical, which is why they look identical. DUH!

That doesn't even disprove what I said, rather affirms it. It's like saying
"The emperor is nude, that's why he seems to have no clothes. DUH!".

~~~
DanBC
> And different opinions are valuable in themselves, as you can't have
> rational, democratic discourse without them.

No one minds different opinions. But people do want a bit more substance in
those opinions so that there can be some kind of discussion.

> I can't downvote, so this is the only way I could express my disapproval.

Not upvoting this article, but upvoting other articles, would have been one
way to express disapproval.

~~~
sublimit
Well, didn't my previous post have substance? It's like everything I say
nowadays gets buried. I'm going to guess it's power users trying to silence
the small fry.

~~~
DanBC
Your first post in this thread was empty. Unfortunately there is a kind of
"pile on" effect, where all your posts in this thread get downvoted even if
those posts don't deserve a downvote.

Hopefully that will correct after a few hours - other people will upvote any
incorrectly downvoted comments.

