Talk:Elbrus (computer)

Superscalar OoO

Elbrus-1 was not the first. CDC6600 and IBM 360/91 are attributed to be OoO. Elbrus-1 could not even decode more than one instruction/cycle https://people.cs.clemson.edu/~mark/stretch_superscalar.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.241.247.189 (talk) 18:07, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled

If somebody makes an article about Soviet computing, this article form Creative Computing could help. -- Error 03:07, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)

How about the Strela computer - a 43 bit machine = 35 bit mantissa, 6 bit exponent 1953-1956 169.207.90.122 03:16, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)

The Strela led me to the parent URL which lists some unusual architectures, including machines with base-3 logic. Clearly, like the Strela, many of these architectures were original and creative, and not carbon copies of the US machines. 169.207.90.122 03:49, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Cyrillic Name

"(ЭЛЬБРУС)" is all caps, and probably not true to the Soviet & Russian usage. --Jerzy 02:57, 2003 Dec 7 (UTC)

Incorrect statement

E2K should not be mentioned as vaporware because it's already become real, look at http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AD%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%B1%D1%80%D1%83%D1%81_2000_(%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%86%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BE%D1%80)

Grossly wrong!

The E2K was not vaporware, the design was tape-ready. They simply did not have the 100mio dollars to pay for prototyping as only a western fab could manufacture it, not any domestic russian chip plant. You can read here that Intel bought the E2K design IP rights in 2004, that's what happened to this innovative design: www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20040525031730.html

The article shoud thus be corrected!

(Also, I shall mention the rumour over IRC, that a massively parallel E2K-like architecture machine was built in the late 1990s or early 2000s and is being used for crypto cracking. Elcomsoft recently cracked the RSA-512 protecting Intuit Quicken fiscal databases, which may well be interpreted as an attack on the financial aspects of US economy and national security. A year ago Moscow's Kaspersky Lab anti-virus firm somehow cracked the 660-bit strong encryption of an Office file encasing blackmail computer worm to let users get their documents black. People on IRC claim both feats were done with a massive multi-E2K-ish domestic russkie system. 82.131.210.162 12:19, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

No, Intel did not bought rights for E2K

Because it is Russian state property. Intel "bought" Babayan team, they left the company. MCST continued to work with new managment and new team. 147.91.1.41 19:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Концепция операционной системы-1 - Ориентация на SuperCISC

re: http://realurix.livejournal.com/2007/10/16/

• Can someone confirm the SuperCISC is VLIW?
• Is is the Elbrus 3 that is "hardware implementation of a subset of ALGOL-68"

c.f. "По тому, что я читал о проекте "Эльбрус" и по общению с некоторыми людьми, работавшими в этом проекте, у меня сложилось мнение, что внутренним языком "железяки" должна была быть аппаратная реализация подмножества языка Алгол-68."

NevilleDNZ (talk)

Seems, he is not from project team "читал о проекте "Эльбрус" и по общению с некоторыми людьми". Also, where can I find the SuperCISC term definition? About Algol = "у меня сложилось мнение", it is not a RS. `a5b (talk) 12:28, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

SPARC compatible systems vs own designs

The article needs clearer distinction what were the SPARC compatible chips and group the rest by compatibility and similarity. Richiez (talk) 10:05, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

When you title this section "vs own design", what do you mean? Both classes are designed in MCST/ ITMiVT. Also, there are no SPARCs listed in the article. `a5b (talk) 03:00, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

The article lead says that some models were SPARC compatible. The Elbrus 1-3 obviously were not but the information given on E2K is conflicting: one line says it is "a project to implement Elbrus 3 architecture as a microprocessor" while the next line implies (probably wrongly) that it has something to do with SPARC. After reading it once again it seems that the Elbrus-90micro is the only SPARCy CPU mentioned in the article? Richiez (talk) 09:45, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

'Elbrus-90micro' is a series of sparc-compatible computers, which use SPARC chips named MCST R-150, MCST R-500, MCST R-500S (in russian: МЦСТ R-150, МЦСТ R-500, МЦСТ R-500S). These chips are designed by MCST. Also, SPARC is not a EPIC/VLIW. `a5b (talk) 12:25, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, looks much better now. Richiez (talk) 13:44, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Nickname

Due to the design similarities of Elbrus 1,2 with a Burroughs system, it was nicknamed El-Burroughs. I kid you not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.205.81.5 (talk) 14:05, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Elbrus (computer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304055344/http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/elbrus-e2k.html to http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/elbrus-e2k.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:44, 18 September 2017 (UTC)