Post by John SavardIBM took the 370/168, and implemented it in newer technologies, to
produce the IBM 3033 computer.
I knew the AS/400 evolved out of the FS project, but hadn't remembered
the details - that the System/38 was the predecessor of the AS/400.
It is interesting that the later IBM 3081 was *also* an FS outgrowth;
the high-end FS prototype performing so well when 'emulating' a 370 that
it became IBM's top-of-the-line 370.
not exactly 360/85 info (which I have no direct info)
there is some folklore that the pok group did 165->168->3033->3090
and the kingston group did 155->158->3081
along the way there was the 3031 and 3032 (in addition to the 3033).
the 303x line was differentiated by the "channel director" ... the 158
had integrated channels with the machine engine shared between 370
microcode and channel microcode. for the 303x, they packaged the 158
engine w/o the 370 microcode ... just the integrated channel microcode
as the channel director. the 370/158 was then repackaged as the 3031
working with a channel director (i.e. effectively now a dual processor
with two engines ... however one with only the 370 microcode and one
with only the channel microcode). the 168 was repackaged as the 3032
to work with the channel director.
the 3033 started out as 168 wiring diagram mapped to denser and faster
chip technology ... but only using the same number of circuits per
chip as used in the 168 (meaning only about 20percent faster). because
of competition and other issues, there was some rework of the logic to
use some of the additional circuits per chip ... eventually the 3033
was 50percent faster than 168 (approx. 4.5mips instead of 3.0 mips).
part of the 3033 folklore was that it was an extremely hurryup project
after FS had been killed
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#futuresys
since so much corporate effort had been diverted to FS during that
period ... that there was very little in the 370 pipeline (i.e. FS
doctrine was that FS was going to completely replace 370).
the 3081 architecture code name was 811 for nov78 ... extending 370
architecture to 31bit virtual addressing (not that the 360/67
previously had both 24-bit and 32-bit virtual addressing) and misc
other features ... no FS features (the other stuff is pure rumor)
... just extending the 155/158 microcoded lineage to faster technology
(while 165/168 lineage was much more hardwired).
The FS folklore is that the final nail in the FS coffin was a study by
the houston science center that showed if FS architecture was
implemented on the fastest, currently available technology (370/195),
that 370/195 applications would have thruput of about 370/145
(somewhere around a factor of 20-30 times slowdown). optimized codes
would peak around 10mips on 195 ... a lot of more conventional stuff
ran around 5mips (no branch prediction or speculative execution,
branches just drained the pipeline ... except for special case of
looping within the pipeline buffer). 370/145 was in the .3mip to .5mip
range.
3081 was going to be a multiprocessor offering only. initial 3081D had
approx. two five mip engines. later 3081K had pair of approx. 7mip
engines (14mips aggregate). because of some operating systems not
having multiprocessor support (primarily TPF, the old airline control
program), they were eventually forced to ship a single processor 3083.
as an aside, prior to 3081, multiprocessors had been totally
independent systems that got lashed together ... but could be
separated and run as independent single processor complexes. they
differentiated3081 as being "dyadic" ... which it had two processors
... it couldn't be separated into two independent single processor
systems (although there was 3084 which was essnentially a pair of
3081s).
a recent posting including an old discussion about some of the differences
between the predominately microcode 3081 and the much more hardwired
3090 ("trout" in the following refers to 3090):
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006j.html#27 virtual memory
misc. past postings mentioning 3083/tpf:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#103 IBM 9020 computers used by FAA (was Re: EPO stories (was: HELP IT'S HOT!!!!!))
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#65 oddly portable machines
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#9 4341 was "Is a VAX a mainframe?"
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#69 TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#37 John Mashey's greatest hits
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001c.html#13 LINUS for S/390
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001j.html#17 I hate Compaq
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#9 IBM Doesn't Make Small MP's Anymore
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#83 HONE
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002m.html#67 Tweaking old computers?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#28 TPF
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#58 AMP vs SMP
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#30 One Processor is bad?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003p.html#45 Saturation Design Point
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004.html#7 Dyadic
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004c.html#35 Computer-oriented license plates
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004e.html#44 Infiniband - practicalities for small clusters
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005.html#22 The Soul of Barb's New Machine (was Re: creat)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005j.html#16 Performance and Capacity Planning
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005m.html#55 54 Processors?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005o.html#44 Intel engineer discusses their dual-core design
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#7 Performance of zOS guest
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#38 MVCIN instruction
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#5 IBM 610 workstation computer
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006l.html#30 One or two CPUs - the pros & cons
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006m.html#32 Old Hashing Routine
misc. past postings mentioning 303x channel director:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/95.html#3 What is an IBM 137/148 ???
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/97.html#20 Why Mainframes?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#69 Does the word "mainframe" still have a meaning?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#7 4341 was "Is a VAX a mainframe?"
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#11 4341 was "Is a VAX a mainframe?"
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#12 4341 was "Is a VAX a mainframe?"
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#11 360/370 instruction cycle time
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#69 Z/90, S/390, 370/ESA (slightly off topic)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#83 Z/90, S/390, 370/ESA (slightly off topic)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001j.html#3 YKYGOW...
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002.html#36 a.f.c history checkup... (was What specifications will the standard year 2001 PC have?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002d.html#7 IBM Mainframe at home
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#59 AMP vs SMP
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#39 Flex Question
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#22 303x, idals, dat, disk head settle, and other rambling folklore
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004.html#9 Dyadic
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004.html#10 Dyadic
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004d.html#65 System/360 40 years old today
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#50 Chained I/O's
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#17 mainframe and microprocessor
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004o.html#7 Integer types for 128-bit addressing
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005b.html#26 CAS and LL/SC
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#62 Misuse of word "microcode"
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#40 Software for IBM 360/30
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#1 Intel engineer discusses their dual-core design
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005q.html#30 HASP/ASP JES/JES2/JES3
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#22 MVCIN instruction