Re: 65816 in a IIe? (or, buddy, can you spare a 65802?)

[shack@southwind.net (Randy Shackelford)]

In article <392D2155.D55F3C0B@somewhere.com>, Jay  <Jay@somewhere.com> wrote:

>> >Alternatively, anyone have a spare 65802 they don't want?  Were
>> >these used commonly in any machine/device that I might find an
>> >old one of?
>> 
>> I doubt that any type of device used 'em since they'd use 65C02s if the
>> pinout was such, or a 65816 if they needed the instructins 'n stuff. They
>> were meant to upgrade old computers, mainly Apple IIs I suspect, but that
>> never really materialized.
>> 
>> Tee hee, I got CMD to send me a free engineering sample way back in '89
>> when I was calling around trying to buy one. It's still in my //e.
>
>What benefits does the 65802 provide over the 65C02?
>Is it 100% compatable?

Well the idea was to give all the addressing modes and 16 bit processing in
a package that's pin for pin the same as a 6502. So if people wrote software
to use it, you could get some decent processing power. But there's the rub,
that really never happened since the IIgs with a real 65816 came out.

And it turns out that a 65802 is more compatible with a 6502 than is a 65C02
since it fixed some bugs in the 6502 without changing any clock cycle counts
on any instructions. The 65C02 fixed 'em at the cost of adding a cycle to
a few instructions. But that's of little practical concern.
--
Offsite mail to this host gets nuked.