Oops
-
Codeproject Newsletter states: Last operating ICT 1301 mainframe computer set to run again[^] 1MHz, 576KB, no waiting(thanks Ravi Bhavnani) Really slow by todays standards, very small memory today also. Then I read the article, it says 576kb. That's 72KB, eight times smaller number because the measured size (KB) is 8 times bigger than kb or Kb. (b is for bits, B is for Bytes, I think k and K both mean 2 to the 10th power.) So, who made the typo?
-
Codeproject Newsletter states: Last operating ICT 1301 mainframe computer set to run again[^] 1MHz, 576KB, no waiting(thanks Ravi Bhavnani) Really slow by todays standards, very small memory today also. Then I read the article, it says 576kb. That's 72KB, eight times smaller number because the measured size (KB) is 8 times bigger than kb or Kb. (b is for bits, B is for Bytes, I think k and K both mean 2 to the 10th power.) So, who made the typo?
Don't assume 8-bit bytes either. "Its main memory came in increments of 400 words of 48 bits (12 decimal digits) plus two parity bits. The maximum size was 2,000 words" -- Wikipedia
-
Codeproject Newsletter states: Last operating ICT 1301 mainframe computer set to run again[^] 1MHz, 576KB, no waiting(thanks Ravi Bhavnani) Really slow by todays standards, very small memory today also. Then I read the article, it says 576kb. That's 72KB, eight times smaller number because the measured size (KB) is 8 times bigger than kb or Kb. (b is for bits, B is for Bytes, I think k and K both mean 2 to the 10th power.) So, who made the typo?
That would be me - fingers aren't used to typing KB in lower case anymore.
-------------- TTFN - Kent
-
Don't assume 8-bit bytes either. "Its main memory came in increments of 400 words of 48 bits (12 decimal digits) plus two parity bits. The maximum size was 2,000 words" -- Wikipedia
I still fondly remember the CDC computer with its 60 bit (10 character) word size who put to shame IBM's accuracy. IBM's double was quite a bit less accurate than CDC's float. You had to do something special to support mixed case letters, which reduced the size to 5 characters per word. (You had to dedicate one character to indicate the next letter was lower case.)
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
400 words of 48 bits (12 decimal digits)
That would be just under 19Kb which jibes with the article. CDC NEVER used decimal digits except when printing or converting to text. It would take a lot of additional processing to maintain digital numbering while also doing mathematical operations. You could almost (one short) store a 10 billion number in its word. A 48 bit signed integer could hold a number value of 280 trillion. A 60 bit integer could hold a number over 4 million times bigger than that.
-
That would be me - fingers aren't used to typing KB in lower case anymore.
-------------- TTFN - Kent
Thanks for pointing out the article in the newsletter. Never ever used that mainframe, but it brought back memories. When I first saw PC's in the 80's, it was a joke compared to the mainframes I was using. Now my laptop makes the mainframes I was using a joke in comparison.
-
Thanks for pointing out the article in the newsletter. Never ever used that mainframe, but it brought back memories. When I first saw PC's in the 80's, it was a joke compared to the mainframes I was using. Now my laptop makes the mainframes I was using a joke in comparison.
You're very welcome. It's probably the case that an iPod Touch or a watch has as much computing power as some of those beasts. After all, the iPad 2 is supposed to be as fast as the Cray 2[^], and I remember seeing one of those working once and it was crazy fast.
-------------- TTFN - Kent
-
You're very welcome. It's probably the case that an iPod Touch or a watch has as much computing power as some of those beasts. After all, the iPad 2 is supposed to be as fast as the Cray 2[^], and I remember seeing one of those working once and it was crazy fast.
-------------- TTFN - Kent
The first Cray was crazy fast because of vector processing and the chips were so small they could generally be within 2 feet of each other. (In a four foot square area, 8 feet high) The smaller size reduced the speed of light transfer time significantly. The vector processing was just automatic multi-threading the code did for you when it compiled a loop. It would determine the loop could be vectorized, it would move 64 step values into 64 separate register locations, simultaneously execute the logic, increase the location 64 times the step size and repeat. It was incredible, the compiler just did the multithreading logic for you. I worked with them all the time, but I only saw them in pictures.
-
That would be me - fingers aren't used to typing KB in lower case anymore.
-------------- TTFN - Kent
Kent Sharkey wrote:
KB
:mad: No shouting in the Lounge! :mad:
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
You're very welcome. It's probably the case that an iPod Touch or a watch has as much computing power as some of those beasts. After all, the iPad 2 is supposed to be as fast as the Cray 2[^], and I remember seeing one of those working once and it was crazy fast.
-------------- TTFN - Kent
Kent Sharkey wrote:
iPod Touch ~~ iPad 2
Is that how we measure processing speed, these days? In that case, my EUR 150 android tab = 2 ipad 3s. How strange that 2 ipad 3s also = EUR 1200.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!