Genesis at Motorola Motorola started the 6800 microprocessor project in 1971 with Tom Bennett as the main architect. Bennett hired
Chuck Peddle in 1973 to do architectural support work on the 6800 family products already in progress. Bennett already was at work on what became the 6800. "He hired me," Peddle says of Bennett, "to do the architectural support work for the product he'd already started." … Peddle says. "Motorola tried to kill it several times. Without Bennett, the 6800 would not have happened, and a lot of the industry would not have happened, either." Peddle contributed in many areas, including the design of the 6850 ACIA (serial interface). Peddle would accompany Motorola salespeople on customer visits, and found that customers were put off by the high cost of the microprocessor chips. At the same time, these visits invariably resulted in the engineers he presented to producing lists of required instructions that were much smaller than "all these fancy instructions" that had been included in the 6800. Peddle and other team members started outlining the design of an improved feature, reduced-size microprocessor. At that time, Motorola's new semiconductor fabrication facility in
Austin, Texas, was having difficulty producing MOS chips, and mid-1974 was the beginning of a year-long recession in the semiconductor industry. Also, many of the
Mesa, Arizona employees were displeased with the upcoming relocation to Austin. Motorola's Semiconductor Products Division management showed no interest in Peddle's low-cost microprocessor proposal. Eventually, Peddle was given an official letter telling him to stop working on the system. Peddle responded to the order by informing Motorola that the letter represented an official declaration of "project abandonment", and as such, the intellectual property he had developed to that point was now his. The 6502 was designed by many of the same engineers that had designed the
Motorola 6800 microprocessor family. In a November 1975 interview, Motorola's Chairman,
Bob Galvin, ultimately agreed that Peddle's concept was a good one and that the division missed an opportunity, "We did not choose the right leaders in the Semiconductor Products division." The division was reorganized and the management replaced. The new group vice president John Welty said, "The semiconductor sales organization lost its sensitivity to customer needs and couldn't make speedy decisions."
MOS Technology Peddle began looking outside Motorola for a source of funding for this new project. He initially approached
Mostek CEO
L. J. Sevin, but was declined. Sevin later admitted this was because he was afraid Motorola would sue them. While Peddle was visiting
Ford Motor Company on one of his sales trips, Bob Johnson, later head of Ford's engine automation division, mentioned that their former colleague John Paivinen had moved to
General Instrument and taught himself semiconductor design. Paivinen then formed
MOS Technology in
Valley Forge, Pennsylvania in 1969 with two other executives from General Instrument, Mort Jaffe and Don McLaughlin.
Allen-Bradley, a supplier of electronic components and industrial controls, acquired a majority interest in 1970. The company designed and fabricated custom ICs for customers and had developed a line of calculator chips. After the Mostek efforts fell through, Peddle approached Paivinen, who "immediately got it". On 19 August 1974, Chuck Peddle, Bill Mensch, Rod Orgill, Harry Bawcom, Ray Hirt, Terry Holdt, and Wil Mathys left Motorola to join MOS. Mike Janes joined later. Of the seventeen chip designers and layout people on the 6800 team, eight left. The goal of the team was to design and produce a low-cost microprocessor for embedded applications and to target as wide as possible a customer base. This would be possible only if the microprocessor was low cost, and the team set the price goal for volume purchases at . Mensch later stated the goal was not the processor price itself, but to create a set of chips that could sell at to compete with the recently introduced
Intel 4040 that sold for in a similar complete chipset. Chips are produced by printing multiple copies of the chip design on the surface of a
wafer, a thin disk of highly pure silicon. Smaller chips can be printed in greater numbers on the same wafer, decreasing their relative price. Additionally, wafers always include some number of tiny physical defects that are scattered across the surface. Any chip printed in that location will fail and has to be discarded. Smaller chips mean any single copy is less likely to be printed on a defect. For both of these reasons, the cost of the final product is strongly dependent on the size of the chip design. The original 6800 chips were intended to be , but layout was completed at , or an area of . For the new design, the cost goal demanded a size goal of , or an area of , roughly half that of the 6800. Several new techniques would be needed to hit this goal.
Moving to NMOS Two significant advances arrived in the market just as the 6502 was being designed that provided significant cost reductions. The first was the move to
depletion-load NMOS. The 6800 used an early
NMOS process, enhancement mode, that required three supply voltages. One of the 6800's headlining features was an onboard
voltage doubler that allowed a single +5 V supply be used for +5, −5 and +12 V internally, as opposed to other chips of the era like the
Intel 8080 that required three separate supply pins. While this feature reduced the complexity of the power supply and pin layout, it still required separate power line to the various gates on the chip, driving up complexity and size. By moving to the new depletion-load design, a single +5 V supply was all that was needed, eliminating all of this complexity. A further advantage was that depletion-load designs used less power while switching, thus running cooler and allowing higher operating speeds. Another practical offshoot is that the clock signal for earlier
CPUs had to be strong enough to survive all the dissipation as it traveled through the circuits, which almost always required a separate external chip that could supply a powerful signal. With the reduced power requirements of depletion-load design, the clock could be moved onto the chip, simplifying the overall computer design. These changes greatly reduced complexity and the cost of implementing a complete system. A wider change taking place in the industry was the introduction of
projection masking. Previously, chips were patterned onto the surface of the wafer by placing a
mask on the surface of the wafer and then shining a bright light on it. The masks often picked up tiny bits of dirt or
photoresist as they were lifted off the chip, causing flaws in those locations on any subsequent masking. With complex designs like CPUs, 5 or 6 such masking steps would be used, and the chance that at least one of these steps would introduce a flaw was very high. In most cases, 90% of such designs were flawed, resulting in a 10% yield. The price of the working examples had to cover the production cost of the 90% that were thrown away. In 1973,
Perkin-Elmer introduced the
Micralign system, which projected an image of the mask on the wafer instead of requiring direct contact. Masks no longer picked up dirt from the wafers and lasted on the order of 100,000 uses rather than 10. This eliminated step-to-step failures and the high flaw rates formerly seen on complex designs. Yields on CPUs immediately jumped from 10% to 60 or 70%. This meant the price of the CPU declined roughly the same amount and the microprocessor suddenly became a commodity device.
Design notes Chuck Peddle, Rod Orgill, and Wil Mathys designed the initial architecture of the new processors. A September 1975 article in
EDN magazine gives this summary of the design: The MOS Technology 650X family represents a conscious attempt of eight former Motorola employees who worked on the development of the 6800 system to put out a part that would replace and outperform the 6800, yet undersell it. With the benefit of hindsight gained on the 6800 project, the MOS Technology team headed by Chuck Peddle, made the following architectural changes in the Motorola CPU… The main change in terms of chip size was the elimination of the
tri-state drivers from the address bus outputs. A three-state bus has states for
1,
0 and
high impedance. The last state is used to allow other devices to access the bus, and is typically used for
multiprocessing, or more commonly in these roles, for
direct memory access (DMA). While useful, this feature is expensive in terms of on-chip circuitry. The 6502 simply removed this feature, in keeping with its design as an inexpensive controller being used for specific tasks and communicating with simple devices. Peddle suggested that anyone who required this style of access could implement it with a
74158. The next major difference was to simplify the registers. To start with, one of the two
accumulators was removed. General-purpose registers like accumulators have to be accessed by many parts of the instruction decoder, and thus require significant amounts of wiring to move data to and from their storage. Two accumulators makes many coding tasks easier but costs the chip design itself significant complexity. Further savings were made by reducing the
stack register from 16 to 8 bits, meaning that the stack could only be 256 bytes long, which was enough for its intended role as a microcontroller. The 16-bit IX
index register was split in two, becoming X and Y. More importantly, the style of access changed. In the 6800, IX held a 16-bit address which was offset by an 8-bit number stored with the instruction and added to the address. In the 6502 (and most other contemporary designs), the 16-bit base address was stored in the instruction, and the 8-bit X or Y was added to it. Finally, the instruction set was simplified, simplifying the decoder and control logic. Of the original 72 instructions in the 6800, 56 were implemented. Among those removed were instructions that operated between the 6800's two accumulators, and several branch instructions inspired by the
PDP-11. The chip's high-level design had to be turned into drawings of transistors and interconnects. At MOS Technology, the layout was a very manual process done with colored pencils and
vellum paper. The layout consisted of thousands of polygon shapes on six different drawings; one for each layer of the fabrication process. Given the size limits, the entire chip design had to be constantly considered. Mensch and Paivinen worked on the
instruction decoder while Mensch, Peddle and Orgill worked on the ALU and registers. A further advance, developed at a party, was a way to share some of the internal wiring to allow the ALU to be reduced in size. Despite their best efforts, the final design ended up being larger than the original target. The first 6502 chips were , for an area of . The original version of the processor had no rotate right (ROR) capability, so the instruction was omitted from the original documentation. The next iteration of the design shrank the chip and added the rotate right capability, and ROR was included in revised documentation.
Introducing the 6501 and 6502 MOS would introduce two microprocessors based on the same underlying design: the 6501 would plug into the same socket as the Motorola 6800, while the 6502 re-arranged the pinout to support an on-chip clock oscillator. Both would work with other support chips designed for the 6800. They would not run 6800 software because they had a different instruction set, different registers, and mostly different addressing modes. Stories also ran in
EE Times (August 24, 1975),
EDN (September 20, 1975),
Electronic News (November 3, 1975),
Byte (November 1975) and
Microcomputer Digest (November 1975). Advertisements for the 6501 appeared in several publications the first week of August 1975. The 6501 would be for sale at WESCON for each. In September 1975, the advertisements included both the 6501 and the 6502 microprocessors. The 6502 would cost only (). When MOS Technology arrived at Wescon, they found that exhibitors were not permitted to sell anything on the show floor. They rented the MacArthur Suite at the
St. Francis Hotel and directed customers there to purchase the processors. At the suite, the processors were stored in large jars to imply that the chips were in production and readily available. The customers did not know the bottom half of each jar contained non-functional chips. The chips were and while the documentation package was an additional . Users were encouraged to make
photocopies of the documents, an inexpensive way for MOS Technology to distribute product information. The preliminary data sheets listed just 55 instructions and excluded the Rotate Right (ROR) instruction, which was not supported on these early chips. The reviews in
Byte and
EDN noted the lack of the ROR instruction. The next revision of the layout fixed this problem and the May 1976 datasheet listed 56 instructions. Peddle wanted every interested engineer and hobbyist to have access to the chips and documentation, whereas other semiconductor companies only wanted to deal with "serious" customers. For example,
Signetics was introducing the
2650 microprocessor and its advertisements asked readers to write for information on their company letterhead.
Motorola lawsuit version. The 6501/6502 introduction in print and at Wescon was a success. The press coverage got Motorola's attention, precipitating pricing adjustments and lawsuits. In October 1975, Motorola reduced the price of a single 6800 microprocessor from to . The system design kit was reduced to and it now came with a printed circuit board. On November 3, 1975, Motorola sought an injunction in Federal Court to stop MOS Technology from making and selling microprocessor products. They also filed a lawsuit claiming patent infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets. Motorola claimed that seven former employees joined MOS Technology to create that company's microprocessor products. Motorola was a billion-dollar company with a plausible case and expensive lawyers. On October 30, 1974, Motorola had filed numerous patent applications on the microprocessor family and was granted twenty-five patents. The first was in June 1976 and the second was to Bill Mensch on July 6, 1976, for the 6820 PIA chip layout. These patents covered the 6800 bus and how the peripheral chips interfaced with the microprocessor. Motorola began making transistors in 1950 and had a portfolio of semiconductor patents. Allen-Bradley decided not to fight this case and sold their interest in MOS Technology back to the founders. Four of the former Motorola engineers were named in the suit: Chuck Peddle, Will Mathys, Bill Mensch and Rod Orgill. All were named inventors in the 6800 patent applications. During the discovery process, Motorola found that one engineer, Mike Janes, had ignored Peddle's instructions and brought his 6800 design documents to MOS Technology. In March 1976, the now independent MOS Technology was running out of money and had to settle the case. They agreed to drop the 6501 processor, pay Motorola and return the documents that Motorola contended were confidential. Both companies agreed to
cross-license microprocessor patents. That May, Motorola dropped the price of a single 6800 microprocessor to . By November,
Commodore had acquired MOS Technology.
Computers and games With legal troubles behind them, MOS was still left with the problem of getting developers to try their processor, prompting Chuck Peddle to design the MDT650 development system. Another group inside the company designed the
KIM-1, which was sold semi-complete and could be turned into a usable system with the addition of a 3rd party
computer terminal and
compact cassette drive. While it sold well to its intended market, the company found the KIM-1 also sold well to hobbyists and tinkerers. The related Rockwell
AIM-65 control, training, and development system also did well. The software in the AIM 65 was based on that in the MDT. Another roughly similar product was the Synertek
SYM-1. One of the first external uses for the design was the
Apple I microcomputer, introduced in 1976. The 6502 was next used in the
Commodore PET and
Apple II, both released in 1977. It was later used in the
Atari 8-bit computers,
Acorn Atom,
BBC Micro,
Commodore 64 home computer. Another important use of the 6500 family was in video games. The first to make use of the processor design was the 1977 Atari VCS, later renamed the
Atari 2600. The VCS used a 6502 variant named the
6507, which had fewer pins, so it could address only 8
KB of memory. Millions of the Atari consoles would be sold, each with a MOS processor. Another significant use was by the
Nintendo Entertainment System (NES) and Famicom. The 6502 used in the NES was a
second source version by
Ricoh, a partial
system on a chip, that lacked the
binary-coded decimal mode but added 22 memory-mapped registers and on-die hardware for sound generation, joypad reading, and
sprite list
DMA. Called
2A03 in
NTSC consoles and
2A07 in
PAL consoles, this processor was produced exclusively for
Nintendo. 6502 or variants were used in all of Commodore's
floppy disk drives for all of their 8-bit computers, from the PET line through the Commodore 128D, including the Commodore 64. 8-inch PET drives had two 6502 processors. Atari used the same 6507 used in the Atari 2600 for its
810 and
1050 disk drives used for all of their 8-bit computer line, from the 400/800 through the XEGS. In the 1980s, a popular electronics magazine
Elektor used the processor in its microprocessor development board
Junior Computer. The CMOS successor to the 6502, the
WDC 65C02, also saw use in home computers and video game consoles. Apple used it in the Apple II line, starting with the
Apple IIc and later variants of the
Apple IIe, and also offered a kit to upgrade older IIe systems with the new processor. The
Hudson Soft HuC6280 chip used in the
TurboGrafx-16 was based on a 65C02 core. The
Atari Lynx used a custom chip named "Mikey" designed by
Epyx which included a VLSI VL65NC02 licensed cell. The G65SC12 by
GTE Microcircuits (renamed California Micro Devices) variant was used in the
BBC Master. Some models of the BBC Master also included an additional G65SC102 co-processor. File:Acorn atom zx1.jpg|
Acorn Atom File:Acorn Electron 4x3.jpg|
Acorn Electron File:CopsonApple1 2k cropped.jpg|
Apple I File:Apple II tranparent 800.png|
Apple II File:Apple IIe.jpg|
Apple IIe File:Atari-2600-Console.jpg|
Atari 2600 File:Atari-5200-4-Port-wController-L.jpg|
Atari 5200 File:Atari-7800-Console-Set.jpg|
Atari 7800 File:Atari-800-Computer-FL.jpg|
Atari 800 File:Atari-Lynx-I-Handheld.jpg|
Atari Lynx File:Acorn BBC Master Series.jpg|
BBC Master File:STM Systems Baby! 1 computer.jpg|
Baby! 1 File:BBC Micro Front Restored.jpg|
BBC Micro File:Commodore 2001 Series-IMG 0448b.jpg|
Commodore PET File:Commodore-VIC-20-FL.jpg|
Commodore VIC-20 File:Commodore-64-Computer-FL.jpg|
Commodore 64 File:Commodore-128.jpg|
Commodore 128 File:Nintendo-Famicom-Console-Set-FL.jpg|
Family Computer (Famicom) File:NES-Console-Set.jpg|
Nintendo Entertainment System File:OSI Challenger 4P.jpg|
Ohio Scientific Challenger 4P File:Orao-IMG 7278.jpg|
Orao File:Oric1.jpg|
Oric-1 File:Oric Atmos 01a.jpg|
Oric Atmos File:TurboGrafx16-Console-Set.jpg|
TurboGrafx-16 ==Programmers model==