PC Review


Reply
Thread Tools Rate Thread

cpu pins -> architecture correlation? (beginner question)

 
 
kilik3000@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11th Jul 2007
I'm curious about how the number of pins on a cpu correlates to
underlying architecture. For example on a picture of an old 8086 I
counted 40 pins. From what I've read the 8086 was an 16 bit
architecture. The 80386 had 68 pins. From what I've read this chip
was the first from Intel to support 32 bits.

Is there a correlation between the number of pins on a cpu and the
architecture it will support (8bit, 16, 32, etc.)? If so - what is the
correlation?

-Thx

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Scott Alfter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12th Jul 2007
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Is there a correlation between the number of pins on a cpu and the
>architecture it will support (8bit, 16, 32, etc.)? If so - what is the
>correlation?


Not really. The 6502 is an 8-bit processor and the 65816 is a 16-bit
processor, but both come in the same 40-pin DIP package. For a (slightly)
more modern example, compare the 286 (16-bit) and 386SX (32-bit).

For a more current example, consider the Socket 775 processors that are
available with (Core 2) and without (Pentium 4) 64-bit support.

_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( http://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ rm -rf /bin/laden >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

 
Reply With Quote
 
Robert Redelmeier
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12th Jul 2007
(E-Mail Removed) wrote in part:
> Is there a correlation between the number of pins on a
> cpu and the architecture it will support (8bit, 16, 32,
> etc.)? If so - what is the correlation?


There used to be a _very_ rough correspondence. Once you
take into account duplexing address and data pins, more
bits required more pins. Now there really isn't since most
of the pins are for power or ground.

-- Robert


 
Reply With Quote
 
johannes
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12th Jul 2007


Scott Alfter wrote:
>
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >Is there a correlation between the number of pins on a cpu and the
> >architecture it will support (8bit, 16, 32, etc.)? If so - what is the
> >correlation?

>
> Not really. The 6502 is an 8-bit processor and the 65816 is a 16-bit
> processor, but both come in the same 40-pin DIP package. For a (slightly)
> more modern example, compare the 286 (16-bit) and 386SX (32-bit).


The 386SX had memory connection multiplexed into a half-witdh 16 line bus,
that also made motherboards simpler and cheaper.

> For a more current example, consider the Socket 775 processors that are
> available with (Core 2) and without (Pentium 4) 64-bit support.


The high number of pins on modern chips is really staggering. However, many
pins are used for power supply, delivering 50Amp or more into the chip.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Yousuf Khan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      13th Jul 2007
(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> I'm curious about how the number of pins on a cpu correlates to
> underlying architecture. For example on a picture of an old 8086 I
> counted 40 pins. From what I've read the 8086 was an 16 bit
> architecture. The 80386 had 68 pins. From what I've read this chip
> was the first from Intel to support 32 bits.
>
> Is there a correlation between the number of pins on a cpu and the
> architecture it will support (8bit, 16, 32, etc.)? If so - what is the
> correlation?


Nope, no correlation. The 68-pin 386 may have been a 32-bit processor,
but so were most of its successors upto and including the 771-pin
Pentium 4 and 472-pin Athlon XP. So there was upto an 11-fold increase
in pins without any corresponding upgrade in "bittedness".

Yousuf Khan
 
Reply With Quote
 
Trent
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      13th Jul 2007
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:05:22 -0400 Yousuf Khan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
Message id: <4696b3b1$(E-Mail Removed)>:

>(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>> I'm curious about how the number of pins on a cpu correlates to
>> underlying architecture. For example on a picture of an old 8086 I
>> counted 40 pins. From what I've read the 8086 was an 16 bit
>> architecture. The 80386 had 68 pins. From what I've read this chip
>> was the first from Intel to support 32 bits.
>>
>> Is there a correlation between the number of pins on a cpu and the
>> architecture it will support (8bit, 16, 32, etc.)? If so - what is the
>> correlation?

>
>Nope, no correlation. The 68-pin 386 may have been a 32-bit processor,
>but so were most of its successors upto and including the 771-pin
>Pentium 4 and 472-pin Athlon XP. So there was upto an 11-fold increase
>in pins without any corresponding upgrade in "bittedness".


Yeah, they are 32 bit processors, but the Pentium and higher have a 64 bit
data bus.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
usb header pins question zz DIY PC 6 4th Oct 2005 12:30 AM
Correlation Question Steve Almond Microsoft Excel Worksheet Functions 2 8th Jun 2005 10:21 PM
Anyone know how to straighten pins on a P4 with BENT pins ? Phil Computer Hardware 3 29th Apr 2005 12:29 PM
No Class at ALL!!! beginner/beginner question =?Utf-8?B?S3VydCBTY2hyb2VkZXI=?= Microsoft ASP .NET 7 3rd Feb 2005 02:47 PM
CG 6072 case pins question Joe Blobbs DIY PC 1 20th Jan 2004 05:25 AM


Features
 

Advertising
 

Newsgroups
 


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:21 AM.