Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!portal!cup.portal.com!R_Tim_Coslet
From: R_Tim_Coslet@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: sci.electronics
Subject: Re: "Name These Chips"
Message-ID: <34698@cup.portal.com>
Date: 10 Oct 90 02:43:52 GMT
References: <9689@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu> <4083@kitty.UUCP>
  <1990Oct5.152413.24200@zoo.toronto.edu>
  <1990Oct6.215013.21449@bpdsun1.uucp> <1284@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de>
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Lines: 26

In article <1990Oct6.215013.21449@bpdsun1.uucp> 
	rmf@bpdsun1.UUCP (Rob Finley) writes:
>My favorite was the Motorola 1-bit cpu chip.  Don't remember too many 
>details except an 8085 was cheaper.  They did have an app note where
>it controled traffic signals.  Hmm.  Wonder how it did that... B-).

From what I understand that 1-bit cpu chip was intended for use in highly
parallel variable word length computers that would use thousands of them
together (like the Massively Parallel Processor which had an array of
128 by 128 single bit processors. They used their own custom chip that
had 8 1-bit processors in it, not the motorola chip.) If you ever looked
at the chip's instructions, you will notice that it could be disabled by
setting a bit causing it to ignore the instruction stream; just what you
need when you are sending the same instruction stream to thousands of
processors at the same time and need to "branch" around part of the code
in SOME of those processors.

Whoever wrote that app note came up with a totally unreasonable application
for this chip (that could be much better done with other parts), but it did
illustrate how it could be used without necesitating a multi-million dollar
project to build a "supercomputer" be explained in an app note.

                                        R. Tim Coslet

Usenet: R_Tim_Coslet@cup.portal.com
BIX:    r.tim_coslet