65C02 in verilog - extended version of Arlet's core

[Windfall]

BigEd wrote:

So in some handwavey and incorrect sense that's 500GHz of 6502 power for $15k...

Isn't it a bargain

[hoglet]

BigEd wrote:

So in some handwavey and incorrect sense that's 500GHz of 6502 power for $15k...

== $30 / GHz.

Or with PiTubeDirect on a Pi Zero you get one core of 275 MHz for ~$8.

== $29 / GHz

So surprisingly similar!

Dave

[Windfall]

hoglet wrote:

BigEd wrote:

So in some handwavey and incorrect sense that's 500GHz of 6502 power for $15k...

== $30 / GHz.

Or with PiTubeDirect on a Pi Zero you get one core of 275 MHz for ~$8.

== $29 / GHz

So surprisingly similar!

Dave

Heh Yes it seems that way, doesn't it. Even if you could find something to keep 2000 cores busy.

But I only paid $1500 and $8 is a somewhat optimistic figure.

[Windfall]

Even the ginormously complicated 32016 (with FPU), in the form of the 32016 Second Processor (http://www.zeridajh.org/hardware/soft32 ... /index.htm), will run at 170 MHz on this board ...

[kakemoms]

Just to continue the wavy bistromatics, my unpublished cutdown 8-bit n6502 gets to 100MHz with all instructions 1 cycle (efficiently making it 300+ times faster than 1MHz 6502), takes 250 LUTS and has 1KB address space. Thus one can fit 37 cores into a MachXO3-9400 that costs $13.71..

That gives the equivalent of 11.1GHz or $1.23USD/GHz...

[BigEd]

Sounds like something worth publishing kakmoms! Do you intend to release it? If you do, please don't get blocked by the idea of waiting until it is finished - sharing works in progress is also helpful.

[Windfall]

kakemoms wrote:

Just to continue the wavy bistromatics, my unpublished cutdown 8-bit n6502 gets to 100MHz

Kind of useless if you don't mention on what hardware.

kakemoms wrote:

with all instructions 1 cycle (efficiently making it 300+ times faster than 1MHz 6502), takes 250 LUTS and has 1KB address space.

And somewhere a nose was growing rapidly ...

[BigEd]

Is that hostility I sense John? There's no need for that.

[Windfall]

BigEd wrote:

Is that hostility I sense John? There's no need for that.

Uh .. No ? See the smiley ?

[BigEd]

There are people who park on double yellow lines and put their hazard lights on. It doesn't entirely change what they've done...

But like you, I'd be interested to see more of kakemom's creation.

[Windfall]

BigEd wrote:

There are people who park on double yellow lines and put their hazard lights on. It doesn't entirely change what they've done...

But like you, I'd be interested to see more of kakemom's creation.

I kinda think an all 1-cycle 250-LUT 6502 is a complete (but nice) fantasy. But hey, we shall see (or actually probably not if I'm right).

[Dr Jefyll]

The project is described as a cutdown 6502, not a complete implementation. It's fair to ask how drastic the cutting down was -- and it seems it must've been drastic indeed! -- but the project is unpublished. If it remains so then I'm OK with that. But it'd be interesting to hear some further detail.

[Windfall]

Dr Jefyll wrote:

The project is described as a cutdown 6502, not a complete implementation.

Indeed. But, in my view, it stops being a 6502 if it doesn't execute the expected instruction set. Better call it '6502 inspired' or '6502 challenged', then, if it doesn't. I'd expect 'cutdown' to refer to some external property (like the 1 KB memory limitation).

[kakemoms]

Windfall wrote:

Dr Jefyll wrote:

The project is described as a cutdown 6502, not a complete implementation.

Indeed. But, in my view, it stops being a 6502 if it doesn't execute the expected instruction set. Better call it '6502 inspired' or '6502 challenged', then, if it doesn't. I'd expect 'cutdown' to refer to some external property (like the 1 KB memory limitation).

Well, you are a purist, which is fine. Ultimately 6502 code does or doesn't run on other versions of the 6502, its all about compability level. Try running commodore 64 code on a 2MHz 6502, and it will probably fail due to some
timing-critical routine.

So this is a 6502-like cpu with fewer instructions and some special considerations, but its code will compile on any 6502 assembler.

I may publish it once its finalized.

[Windfall]

kakemoms wrote:

Windfall wrote:

Dr Jefyll wrote:

The project is described as a cutdown 6502, not a complete implementation.

Indeed. But, in my view, it stops being a 6502 if it doesn't execute the expected instruction set. Better call it '6502 inspired' or '6502 challenged', then, if it doesn't. I'd expect 'cutdown' to refer to some external property (like the 1 KB memory limitation).

Well, you are a purist, which is fine. Ultimately 6502 code does or doesn't run on other versions of the 6502, its all about compability level. Try running commodore 64 code on a 2MHz 6502, and it will probably fail due to some
timing-critical routine.

So this is a 6502-like cpu with fewer instructions and some special considerations, but its code will compile on any 6502 assembler.

Okay. Let's just say that your 6502 is not for existing 6502 code. Only new code, adhering to specific and as yet unseen restrictions.