🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3vrf2o$ffq@meaddata.meaddata.com>, christw@meaddata.com (Christopher C. Wood) writes:
|> There's never been a generally agreed-upon definition of bitness.
|> Intel likes bigger bitnesses; they called the 8-bit data bus 8088 a
|> 16-bit processor.  Using the same rules, one would call the 68000 a
|> 32-bit processor.  Motorola used more conservative rules.  Since then,
|> the need for marketing hype has dissuaded them from that responsible
|> stance. 
|> 
|> Chris
|> 
|> -- 
|> Speaking only for myself, of course.
|> Chris Wood    christw@lexis-nexis.com   ChrisCWood@aol.com
Actually, there is a convention to describe bitness, while maybe not "generally agreed-upon",
most processors adhere to it, including the 8088 and the 68000.  This is data path width.
This is not to be confused with register size or external data bus width.  Both the
8088 and the 68000 have 16 bit data paths and are thus classified as 16 bit processors.
-- 
----------------------------------------
Mark Vilas   mvilas@mipos2.intel.com
I do not speak for Intel.