Re: 65832 CPU??? Apple //f???

["Bryan Parkoff" <BParkoff@satx.rr.com>]

Is it possible to obtain the information about 65832 that is on papers which
are never released?  I am interested to know.

--
Yours Truly,

Bryan Parkoff
BParkoff@satx.rr.com
"David Empson" <dempson@actrix.gen.nz> wrote in message
1fadbl1.xe3u4n1xite8eN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz">news:1fadbl1.xe3u4n1xite8eN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz...
> Bryan Parkoff <BParkoff@satx.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > 65832 CPU???  Apple //f???
> >
> >     I have seen many rumors that talk about 65832 CPU that supports 32
bits
> > expanding up to 4GB while 65816 CPU that supports 16 bits expanding up
to
> > 16MB.  Is it true that WDC stopped doing their project to release 65832
CPU?
>
> As far as I know, this product was never released.  It might not have
> even got as far as a prototype, though the design was apparently done on
> paper.
>
> WDC were planning two variants of this CPU.
>
> The 65832 was intended to be pin compatible with the 65816, so it could
> be inserted into a machine which currently used a 65816.  It would have
> had an 8-bit data bus and 24-bit address bus, just like the 65816, but
> with improvements to the CPU architecture and instruction set.
>
> The other variant was the 65032, which would have had a 32-bit address
> bus and possibly a 32-bit data bus, with the same CPU core as the 65832.
> This would have only been usable in a new motherboard design.
>
> This "two variant" plan is the same as with the 16-bit versions: the
> 65802 was pin compatible with the 6502 and 65C02, with the same
> addressing restrictions but an enhanced instruction set and CPU
> architecture, while the 65816 increased the address space to 24 bits but
> wasn't 100% pin compatible with the 8-bit series.  The '802 and '816
> used the same CPU core with different bonding to external pins.
>
> --
> David Empson
> dempson@actrix.gen.nz
>