I quickly looked at some Model 80 memory cards. These are not my cuppa
Joe, I can't really distinguish a significant difference. Sure, the P/Ns
are off by one, but that is not important. That difference could be due
to accounting changes, since the P/Ns could change to to a different production cost. NOT that the chip was different...
As with all IBM lore, "It depends"
Send a sample of each card to Ken... :) He could not only take photos of
the dies, but perhaps also analyze them and tell us exactly what they are.
I could check what cards I have in my storage and figure out how is it
all wired together. That would sure help, but it won't tell the full story.
hoping for another channel mention.Send a sample of each card to Ken... :) He could not only take photos of
the dies, but perhaps also analyze them and tell us exactly what they are. >>
I could check what cards I have in my storage and figure out how is it
all wired together. That would sure help, but it won't tell the full story.
I have Marc's address - and agree that is a great idea. They would probably feature that on video. As I'm waiting for them to drop another video on either the "Bermuda" planar they are analyzing or the working Model 77 with the channel adapter - and
I quickly looked at some Model 80 memory cards. These are not my cuppa
Joe, I can't really distinguish a significant difference. Sure, the P/Ns
are off by one, but that is not important. That difference could be due
to accounting changes, since the P/Ns could change to to a different >production cost. NOT that the chip was different...
As with all IBM lore, "It depends"
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 11:33:29 -0500, Louis Ohland <ohland@charter.net>
wrote:
I quickly looked at some Model 80 memory cards. These are not my cuppa
Joe, I can't really distinguish a significant difference. Sure, the P/Ns
are off by one, but that is not important. That difference could be due
to accounting changes, since the P/Ns could change to to a different
production cost. NOT that the chip was different...
As with all IBM lore, "It depends"
It might be worth looking at the RETAIN tips. They are all on the MoST
CDs. Usually if there was a P/N only change it would have an oblique reference in RETAIN. It usually shows up as an authorized P/N
substitution. Some times they did hide that in the PIMS (parts) system
tho and you had to know where to look. UC.5 cards were that way. If
you looked in the CPU catalogs they had one part number and the
industry systems used another one. Same part, different logistic
strategy. The cross ref was buried in the parts system. They didn't
want terminal guys draining the parts system and a water cool CPU guy
having to wait for a card.
Greg, what systems used sugar cubes?
Any repressed memories of articles on the configuration of a sugar cube?
What was the industry term for these little cubes of sweetness?
On 8/30/2021 14:54, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 11:33:29 -0500, Louis Ohland <ohland@charter.net>
wrote:
I quickly looked at some Model 80 memory cards. These are not my cuppa
Joe, I can't really distinguish a significant difference. Sure, the P/Ns >>> are off by one, but that is not important. That difference could be due
to accounting changes, since the P/Ns could change to to a different
production cost. NOT that the chip was different...
As with all IBM lore, "It depends"
It might be worth looking at the RETAIN tips. They are all on the MoST
CDs. Usually if there was a P/N only change it would have an oblique
reference in RETAIN. It usually shows up as an authorized P/N
substitution. Some times they did hide that in the PIMS (parts) system
tho and you had to know where to look. UC.5 cards were that way. If
you looked in the CPU catalogs they had one part number and the
industry systems used another one. Same part, different logistic
strategy. The cross ref was buried in the parts system. They didn't
want terminal guys draining the parts system and a water cool CPU guy
having to wait for a card.
I am not sure what a sugar cube is. That isn't IBM jargon that I have
heard.
IBM used a technoslovakian name for the little silver metal cube memory,
er, chips on the early 8580 system board memory daughter cards.
What did they call 'em?
On 8/30/2021 17:26, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
I am not sure what a sugar cube is. That isn't IBM jargon that I have
heard.
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 19:57:55 -0500, Louis Ohland <ohland@charter.net>
wrote:
IBM used a technoslovakian name for the little silver metal cube memory,
er, chips on the early 8580 system board memory daughter cards.
What did they call 'em?
On 8/30/2021 17:26, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
I am not sure what a sugar cube is. That isn't IBM jargon that I have
heard.
Those were chips from Fishkill or Burlington. IBM settled on that
silver aluminum cover in the 360 days and it was used on all IBM chips
up until I retired.
They may have made some in the black plastic case
but I am not sure if it really happened.
Usually that meant we got
them from another vendor. Most of the PC stuff was outsourced.
We did have a 1 meg chip in that can pretty early in the game and that
may be what you are seeing.
I can ask over at the IBM retiree BB and see what they say. There are
old guys there who worked in every facet of the IBM business.
I tried to get a couple of the PC engineers interested in talking to
you guys. They could answer a lot of your questions. None seem to be
usenet users.
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 19:57:55 -0500, Louis Ohland <ohland@charter.net>
wrote:
IBM used a technoslovakian name for the little silver metal cube memory,
er, chips on the early 8580 system board memory daughter cards.
What did they call 'em?
On 8/30/2021 17:26, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
I am not sure what a sugar cube is. That isn't IBM jargon that I have
heard.
Those were chips from Fishkill or Burlington. IBM settled on that
silver aluminum cover in the 360 days and it was used on all IBM chips
up until I retired. They may have made some in the black plastic case
but I am not sure if it really happened. Usually that meant we got
them from another vendor. Most of the PC stuff was outsourced.
We did have a 1 meg chip in that can pretty early in the game and that
may be what you are seeing.
I can ask over at the IBM retiree BB and see what they say. There are
old guys there who worked in every facet of the IBM business.
I tried to get a couple of the PC engineers interested in talking to
you guys. They could answer a lot of your questions. None seem to be
usenet users.,
Greg, I have some SWAGs on the sugar cubes.
Can as a heat sink. Mebbee early tech needed a better sink?
Can as something for a deeper component "stack" multi-layer?
Can as something the period assembly machines could use?
I have seen these in RT cards. The "silver cap" / "metal cap" / "sugar
cube" was used for ASICs / Gate Arrays as well, so we need to know what
the technology / method / process was called in the day.
Greg, I have some SWAGs on the sugar cubes.The ones I have taken apart did not use the aluminum can for anything
Can as a heat sink. Mebbee early tech needed a better sink?
Can as something for a deeper component "stack" multi-layer?
Can as something the period assembly machines could use?
I have seen these in RT cards. The "silver cap" / "metal cap" / "sugar
cube" was used for ASICs / Gate Arrays as well, so we need to know what
the technology / method / process was called in the day.
Can as something the period assembly machines could use?
Dunno about that.
On 31.8.2021 15:57, Louis Ohland wrote:
Greg, I have some SWAGs on the sugar cubes.
No need to guess, Louis. The subject is well documented. Ken's blog has
a lot of juicy info and photos about vintage IBM ICs and tech in
general. I.e. here:
https://www.righto.com/2021/01/examining-technology-sample-kit-ibm.html
(the article even mentions the PS/2 DRAMs)
Can as a heat sink. Mebbee early tech needed a better sink?
Normally no, afaik. Perhaps in some special applications?
Can as something for a deeper component "stack" multi-layer?
Yes, the ceramic substrate can be stacked.
Can as something the period assembly machines could use?
Dunno about that.
I have seen these in RT cards. The "silver cap" / "metal cap" / "sugar
cube" was used for ASICs / Gate Arrays as well, so we need to know what
the technology / method / process was called in the day.
IBM used the package to house multiple different technologies over the
years. I think it started with SLT. The tech used in the more modern
machines (incl. PS/2s) was called MST, I think. Correct me if I'm wrong
(or check Ken's blog, I'm sure he explain it... somewhere).
To increase the density of storage, four of these chips were mounted in
a two-layer MST module, yielding an 8-kilobit module. The module in the
box (below) has the square metal case removed, showing the silicon dies inside. These memory modules provided the main memory for the IBM
System/370 models 115 and 125, as well as the memory expansion for the
models 158 and 168 (1972).
The smaller four-inch wafer (1982) holds 288-kilobit dynamic RAM chips,
an unusual size as it isn't a power of 2.15 The explanation is that the
chip holds 32 kilobytes of 9-bit bytes (8 + parity). In the die photo,
you can see that the memory array is mostly obscured by complex wiring
on top of the die. This wiring is due to another unusual part of the
chip's design: for the most efficient layout, the memory bit lines have
a different spacing from the bit decode lines. As a result, irregular
wiring is required to connect the parts of the chip together, forming
the pattern visible on top of the chip. Because this die is on the
wafer, you can see the alignment marks and test circuitry around the
outside of the chip.
The five-inch wafer holds 1-megabit memory chips16 that were used in the
IBM 3090 mainframe17 (1985). This computer used circuit cards with 32 of these chips, providing four megabytes of storage per card, a huge
improvement over the 32-kilobyte card described earlier. The 3090 used multiple memory cards, providing up to 256 megabytes of main storage.
The die ph
oto below shows how the chip consists of 16 rectangular subarrays, each holding 64 kilobits.
On 8/31/2021 10:24, Tomas Slavotinek wrote:
On 31.8.2021 15:57, Louis Ohland wrote:
Greg, I have some SWAGs on the sugar cubes.
No need to guess, Louis. The subject is well documented. Ken's blog has
a lot of juicy info and photos about vintage IBM ICs and tech in
general. I.e. here:
https://www.righto.com/2021/01/examining-technology-sample-kit-ibm.html
(the article even mentions the PS/2 DRAMs)
Can as a heat sink. Mebbee early tech needed a better sink?
Normally no, afaik. Perhaps in some special applications?
Can as something for a deeper component "stack" multi-layer?
Yes, the ceramic substrate can be stacked.
Can as something the period assembly machines could use?
Dunno about that.
I have seen these in RT cards. The "silver cap" / "metal cap" / "sugar
cube" was used for ASICs / Gate Arrays as well, so we need to know what
the technology / method / process was called in the day.
IBM used the package to house multiple different technologies over the
years. I think it started with SLT. The tech used in the more modern
machines (incl. PS/2s) was called MST, I think. Correct me if I'm wrong
(or check Ken's blog, I'm sure he explain it... somewhere).
I have seen these in RT cards. The "silver cap" / "metal cap" / "sugar >>> cube" was used for ASICs / Gate Arrays as well, so we need to know what >>> the technology / method / process was called in the day.
IBM used the package to house multiple different technologies over the
years. I think it started with SLT. The tech used in the more modern
machines (incl. PS/2s) was called MST, I think. Correct me if I'm wrong >> (or check Ken's blog, I'm sure he explain it... somewhere).
de-lidded the early MCGA Gate Array on a Twitch stream to show it had 'IBM' marked on the die - In my opinion, ALL of the VGA and other ASICs need to be looked at (of course it breaks them and the associated planar - we need to start locating some failedI have seen these in RT cards. The "silver cap" / "metal cap" / "sugar >>>>> cube" was used for ASICs / Gate Arrays as well, so we need to know what >>>>> the technology / method / process was called in the day.
IBM used the package to house multiple different technologies over the >>>> years. I think it started with SLT. The tech used in the more modern
machines (incl. PS/2s) was called MST, I think. Correct me if I'm wrong >>>> (or check Ken's blog, I'm sure he explain it... somewhere).
So - there are other "de-lidding" possibilities here too: Consider that the PS/2 VGA chip in this format (on planars like the Model 80 'Type 1' and the 8-bit adapter for the Model 30) is the only one without the Seiko-Epson mark. Eric ('Tube-TimeUS')
Most of the DRAMs will be 4 bits wide I'd say. Easy to verify...
Evil Dave, thinking of the variety of metal capped chips...
"Sugar Cubes" memory
Varied ASICs like VGA, I/O, possumbly sea of gates
I think the sugar cubes could / should be the SIMMplest. The function
chips will be more complex.
I read the page on the early cubes, I think they used a ceramic base? It
is quite possumble that each memory chip was x9, and therefore there was
no need for a dedicated parity chip.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 292 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 192:12:46 |
| Calls: | 6,616 |
| Files: | 12,166 |
| Messages: | 5,315,292 |