[HN Gopher] Complete working transistor-scale replica of the cla...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Complete working transistor-scale replica of the classic MOS6502
       microprocessor
        
       Author : adrian_mrd
       Score  : 124 points
       Date   : 2022-12-03 08:49 UTC (14 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (monster6502.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (monster6502.com)
        
       | tubetime wrote:
       | MOnSter 6502 creator here for any questions...
        
         | java-man wrote:
         | Such a beautiful board! Now do an 8080 :-)
        
           | timbit42 wrote:
           | I'd rather an 1802 or 6809.
        
         | jeffbarr wrote:
         | At the first day on my first professional programming job in
         | 1980 or so, my new manager told me that I would be writing a
         | brand-new 6502 macro assembler, in 6502 assembly language, to
         | replace the slow & limited one supplied by the vendor (Ohio
         | Scientific).
         | 
         | Under his guidance I wrote the assembler, and even earned a
         | raise after simulating the hashing function in FORTRAN and
         | finding it lacking.
         | 
         | I still have very fond memories of that job and of the 6502,
         | and would be interested in purchasing a replica as soon as you
         | go into production!
        
       | yupis wrote:
       | Looks beautiful
        
       | jmole wrote:
       | wow, this is gorgeous. I've had similar ideas, but the execution
       | here is just phenomenal.
        
       | pnw wrote:
       | This would make some incredible, if expensive, wall art for those
       | of us who got started on the 6502.
        
       | pjmlp wrote:
       | Great piece of work!
        
       | tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
       | Why do they expect it to be so expensive? ("It is definitely not
       | cheap to make one of these. We are currently estimating the cost
       | at between $2k - $4k.")
       | 
       | With 4769 components on the board, that would suggest a cost per
       | component of over 40 cents. Looking at JLCPCB prices for SMD
       | assembly and components, I would have expected an order of
       | magnitude less.
        
         | guidoism wrote:
         | I have wondered the same but I think SMD wasn't as cheap a
         | decade ago as it is today for one-off designs. I wonder what a
         | modern day jlc version would cost.
        
           | tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
           | If they do manage to sell it in the $200-400 range, I know
           | what's going to be hanging on my wall.
        
             | jakzurr wrote:
             | Heck yeah!
             | 
             | But actually, I'm thinking a nice framed picture might be
             | pretty nice.
        
         | anadem wrote:
         | from https://monster6502.com/ : "the cost is actually dominated
         | by the component and assembly costs of an extremely large
         | number of tiny components, each of which is individually quite
         | inexpensive. "
        
           | WalterBright wrote:
           | Yup. And the cost of debugging the board because of a mistake
           | in the assembly.
        
         | tubetime wrote:
         | don't forget assembly costs. very few boards have such a large
         | number of components, and they tend to be big and expensive
         | server boards...
         | 
         | larger boards are also more difficult to work with in general.
         | JLCPCB plays a few tricks to keep the costs down on the smaller
         | boards, but once you go past certain limits, the price goes up
         | significantly.
        
         | ajsnigrutin wrote:
         | Most of the components are leds and transistors (and some
         | resistors) and those are (still) dirt cheap... you can get
         | whole microcontrollers for ~3 cents a piece [0] (if you buy a
         | few thousands). PCBs are comparatively cheap, few tens of
         | dollars, depending on the process, and with pick-and-place,
         | assembly is also relatively cheap.
         | 
         | so yeah.. maybe they're making them in some more expensive
         | country or use some exotic components.
         | 
         | [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYhAGnsnO7w
        
       | dis-sys wrote:
       | look at that photo on the top, simply a piece of art. just
       | incredible.
        
       | usr1106 wrote:
       | At 50 kHz, can you understand anything from looking at over 300
       | LEDs? Or is it just the impression that things are happening too
       | fast? Which isn't really the case for 20 times slower than the
       | original 1 MHz.
        
         | tubetime wrote:
         | at 50KHz, the LEDs mostly appear to be on, albeit at different
         | brightness levels. but with the clock rate set much lower (say,
         | below 50hz) it looks a lot more animated.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | mdp2021 wrote:
         | Very surely loops should show a rhythmic pattern. I am sure I
         | have seen equivalent project that run on the browser...
         | 
         | Check e.g. Visual 6502 -
         | http://www.visual6502.org/JSSim/index.html
        
           | jmole wrote:
           | Would be fun to watch this hardware alongside a sorting
           | algorithm visualization like this:
           | https://www.sortvisualizer.com/quicksort/
        
             | fsckboy wrote:
             | from back when computers had really small memory, I've seen
             | software that did sorting on the user screen because the
             | screen at that point was extra available free memory!
        
         | CodeWriter23 wrote:
         | At 1Mhz you could tell certain things, like looping or crashed
         | by looking at the front panel of my Altair 8800.
        
       | usr1106 wrote:
       | Was the design leaked or published or reverse-engineered? Of
       | course today no vendor should have a problem with that kind of
       | secrets becoming public.
        
         | rzzzt wrote:
         | The author mentions the Visual 6502 project in the credits
         | section at the end of the page, which is (was) a long-running
         | reverse-engineering effort to map the chip at the transistor
         | level: http://visual6502.org/
        
           | tubetime wrote:
           | yes, it is based on their reverse engineering work. i hand-
           | copied every transistor from their netlist into a schematic
           | and went from there.
        
       | phkahler wrote:
       | Would be great to display this next to a real delidded 6502 to
       | show the level of integration. Then tell people "that was in the
       | 1970s" and explain how big their phone chip would be. Best visual
       | of scaling ever.
        
         | masklinn wrote:
         | An other thing which would be interesting is a 6502 in a modern
         | process, the 6502 had already had such an update in the 8502 (a
         | smaller and less power-hungry 6510). Or possibly a machine-
         | code-compatible version, if the die shots have revealed known
         | issues which could be fixed by redoing the logic.
         | 
         | Or at least an FPGA with a 6502 burned in (like the 65F02) but
         | I'm not sure it would be _smaller_ as i assume the FPGA has a
         | _lot_ more hardware than the 6502 (even needs).
        
           | kazinator wrote:
           | They would make a million of them one wafer, and then
           | struggle to find them. :)
        
           | rzzzt wrote:
           | WDC still sells the 65C02 (uses CMOS logic instead of NMOS):
           | https://www.westerndesigncenter.com/wdc/chips.php
           | 
           | One fix in this variant is that all reserved/undocumented
           | instructions are NOPs, they don't do anything unexpected.
           | Another one is that you can stop the clock entirely and it
           | will not lose track of what it was doing earlier.
        
             | greenbit wrote:
             | DC to light! Well .. DC to medium-wave broadcast
             | frequencies anyway.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-12-03 23:01 UTC)