MIPS R3000

#1

Post by tosh » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 3:09 PM UTC

MIPS R3000
en.wikipedia.org

Re: MIPS R3000

#2

Post by pinewurst » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 3:41 PM UTC

It's still my favorite RISC processor and the only one that I actually liked coding in assembler (SPARC wasn't fun at all).

Re: MIPS R3000

#3

Post by segfaultbuserr » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 4:08 PM UTC

Alternative history time: what if MIPS R4000 hasn't been killed by Pentium? Would we be running R10000-compatibles now?

Re: MIPS R3000

#4

Post by koblas » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 4:16 PM UTC

segfaultbuserr wrote: post #3

Alternative history time: what if MIPS R4000 hasn't been killed by Pentium? Would we be running R10000-compatibles now?

It was an interesting moment, though there was a higher chance we would have been running SPARC or POWERPC. The architecture was top notch, but the company was too focused on being "MIPS Computers" not "MIPS Technology" at the time.

Re: MIPS R3000

#5

Post by opencl » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 4:26 PM UTC

MIPS is a fun architecture (other than the delay slots that plagued early RISC ISAs) and implementing a subset of it on an FPGA is still a pretty common undergraduate university course project. I was kind of amazed just how simple it is to get a basic CPU working, though even the 1988 version was quite a lot more sophisticated than the class project version (multiple cache levels, having an MMU, probably much better branch predictor, etc).

Re: MIPS R3000

#6

Post by snvzz » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 4:52 PM UTC

segfaultbuserr wrote: post #3

Alternative history time: what if MIPS R4000 hasn't been killed by Pentium? Would we be running R10000-compatibles now?

Even more fun alternative history: What if Motorola didn't end 68000 with the 68060?

68060 released earlier than the pentium, and regardless it had about twice the performance per clock. But then Motorola decided to abandon 68k to focus on PowerPC.

Going further back: What if IBM picked 68000 over the 8086 for the PC?

I'm hoping RISC-V will put an end to x86. It's about time.

Re: MIPS R3000

#7

Post by mepian » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 4:55 PM UTC

pinewurst wrote: post #2

It's still my favorite RISC processor and the only one that I actually liked coding in assembler (SPARC wasn't fun at all).

How annoying were the branch delay slots?

Re: MIPS R3000

#8

Post by 0815test » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 4:59 PM UTC

snvzz wrote: post #6

segfaultbuserr wrote: post #3

Alternative history time: what if MIPS R4000 hasn't been killed by Pentium? Would we be running R10000-compatibles now?

Even more fun alternative history: What if Motorola didn't end 68000 with the 68060? 68060 released earlier than the pentium, and regardless it had about twice the performance per clock. But then Motorola decided to abandon 68k to focus on PowerPC. Going further back: What if IBM picked 68000 over the 8086 for the PC? I'm hoping RISC-V will put an end to x86. It's about time.

> Even more fun alternative history: What if Motorola didn't end 68000 with the 68060?

Well, then we would all be doing our computing on Amigas, or at least on Atari Falcons. People blame C= for the downfall of the Amiga, but Motorola abandoning the 68k line was a much bigger factor, with no immediate way forward being evident at the time.

Re: MIPS R3000

#9

Post by x0re4x » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 5:04 PM UTC

mepian wrote: post #7

pinewurst wrote: post #2

It's still my favorite RISC processor and the only one that I actually liked coding in assembler (SPARC wasn't fun at all).

How annoying were the branch delay slots?

You could always put NOPs into delay slots by default and replace them later with something more useful.

Re: MIPS R3000

#10

Post by tempguy9999 » Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 5:34 PM UTC

snvzz wrote: post #6

segfaultbuserr wrote: post #3

Alternative history time: what if MIPS R4000 hasn't been killed by Pentium? Would we be running R10000-compatibles now?

Even more fun alternative history: What if Motorola didn't end 68000 with the 68060? 68060 released earlier than the pentium, and regardless it had about twice the performance per clock. But then Motorola decided to abandon 68k to focus on PowerPC. Going further back: What if IBM picked 68000 over the 8086 for the PC? I'm hoping RISC-V will put an end to x86. It's about time.

I thought motorola did their own RISC chips, the 88000.