|Produced||From 1978 to 1990s|
|Max. CPU clock rate||5 MHz to 10 MHz|
|Min. feature size||3μm|
The 8086 ("eighty-eighty-six", also called iAPX 86) is a 16-bit microprocessor chip designed by Intel between early 1976 and mid-1978, when it was released. The Intel 8088, released in 1979, was a slightly modified chip with an external 8-bit data bus (allowing the use of cheaper and fewer supporting ICs[note 1]), and is notable as the processor used in the original IBM PC design, including the widespread version called IBM PC XT.
The 8086 gave rise to the x86 architecture which eventually turned out as Intel's most successful line of processors.
- 1 History
- 2 Details
- 3 Chip versions
- 4 Hardware modes
- 5 Peripherals
- 6 Microcomputers using the 8086
- 7 Notes
- 8 See also
- 9 References
- 10 External links
In 1972, Intel launched the 8008, the first 8-bit microprocessor.[note 2] It implemented an instruction set designed by Datapoint corporation with programmable CRT terminals in mind, that also proved to be fairly general purpose. The device needed several additional ICs to produce a functional computer, in part due to it being packaged in a small 18-pin "memory-package", which ruled out the use of a separate address bus (Intel was primarily a DRAM manufacturer at the time).
Two years later, Intel launched the 8080,[note 3] employing the new 40-pin DIL packages originally developed for calculator ICs to enable a separate address bus. It had an extended instruction set that was source- (not binary-) compatible with the 8008 and also included some 16-bit instructions to make programming easier. The 8080 device, often described as the first truly useful microprocessor, was eventually replaced by the depletion-load based 8085 (1977) which could cope with a single 5V power supply instead of the three different operating voltages of earlier chips.[note 4] Other well known 8-bit microprocessors that emerged during these years were Motorola 6800 (1974), General Instrument PIC16X (1975), MOS Technology 6502 (1975), Zilog Z80 (1976), and Motorola 6809 (1978).
The first x86 design
The 8086 project started in May 1976 and was originally intended as a temporary substitute for the ambitious and delayed iAPX 432 project. It was an attempt to draw attention from the less-delayed 16 and 32-bit processors of other manufacturers (such as Motorola, Zilog, and National Semiconductor) and at the same time to counter the threat from the Zilog Z80 (designed by former Intel employees), which became very successful. Both the architecture and the physical chip were therefore developed rather quickly by a small group of people, and using the same basic microarchitecture elements and physical implementation techniques as employed for the slightly older 8085 (and for which the 8086 also would function as a continuation).
Marketed as source compatible, the 8086 was designed to allow assembly language for the 8008, 8080, or 8085 to be automatically converted into equivalent (sub-optimal) 8086 source code, with little or no hand-editing. The programming model and instruction set was (loosely) based on the 8080 in order to make this possible. However, the 8086 design was expanded to support full 16-bit processing, instead of the fairly basic 16-bit capabilities of the 8080/8085.
New kinds of instructions were added as well; full support for signed integers, base+offset addressing, and self-repeating operations were akin to the Z80 design but were all made slightly more general in the 8086. Instructions directly supporting nested ALGOL-family languages such as Pascal and PL/M were also added. According to principal architect Stephen P. Morse, this was a result of a more software centric approach than in the design of earlier Intel processors (the designers had experience working with compiler implementations). Other enhancements included microcoded multiply and divide instructions and a bus-structure better adapted to future co-processors (such as 8087 and 8089) and multiprocessor systems.
The first revision of the instruction set and high level architecture was ready after about three months,[note 5] and as almost no CAD-tools were used, four engineers and 12 layout people were simultaneously working on the chip.[note 6] The 8086 took a little more than two years from idea to working product, which was considered rather fast for a complex design in 1976–1978.
The 8086 was sequenced[note 7] using a mixture of random logic and microcode and was implemented using depletion-load nMOS circuitry with approximately 20,000 active transistors (29,000 counting all ROM and PLA sites). It was soon moved to a new refined nMOS manufacturing process called HMOS (for High performance MOS) that Intel originally developed for manufacturing of fast static RAM products.[note 8] This was followed by HMOS-II, HMOS-III versions, and, eventually, a fully static CMOS version for battery-powered devices, manufactured using Intel's CHMOS processes.[note 9] The original chip measured 33 mm² and minimum feature size was 3.2 μm.
The architecture was defined by Stephen P. Morse with some help and assistance by Bruce Ravenel (the architect of the 8087) in refining the final revisions. Logic designer Jim McKevitt and John Bayliss were the lead engineers of the hardware-level development team[note 10] and William Pohlman the manager for the project. The legacy of the 8086 is enduring in the basic instruction set of today's personal computers and servers; the 8086 also lent its last two digits to later extended versions of the design, such as the Intel 286 and the Intel 386, all of which eventually became known as the x86 family. (Another reference is that the PCI Vendor ID for Intel devices is 8086h.)
|Intel 8086 registers|
Buses and operation
All internal registers, as well as internal and external data buses, were 16 bits wide, firmly establishing the "16-bit microprocessor" identity of the 8086. A 20-bit external address bus gave a 1 MB physical address space (220 = 1,048,576). This address space was addressed by means of internal 'segmentation'. The data bus was multiplexed with the address bus in order to fit a standard 40-pin dual in-line package. 16-bit I/O addresses meant 64 KB of separate I/O space (216 = 65,536). The maximum linear address space was limited to 64 KB, simply because internal registers were only 16 bits wide. Programming over 64 KB boundaries involved adjusting segment registers (see below) and remained so until the 80386 introduced wider (32 bits) main registers (the memory management hardware in the 286 did not help in this regard, as registers were still 16 bits).
Some of the control pins, which carry essential signals for all external operations, had more than one function depending upon whether the device was operated in min or max mode. The former was intended for small single processor systems while the latter was for medium or large systems, using more than one processor.
Registers and instructions
The 8086 has eight more or less general 16-bit registers (including the stack pointer but excluding the instruction pointer, flag register and segment registers). Four of them, AX, BX, CX, DX, could also be accessed as twice as many 8-bit registers (see figure) while the other four, BP, SI, DI, SP, were 16-bit only.
Due to a compact encoding inspired by 8-bit processors, most instructions were one-address or two-address operations which means that the result was stored in one of the operands. At most one of the operands could be in memory, but this memory operand could also be the destination, while the other operand, the source, could be either register or immediate. A single memory location could also often be used as both source and destination which, among other factors, further contributed to a code density comparable to (and often better than) most eight bit machines.
Although the degree of generality of most registers were much greater than in the 8080 or 8085, it was still fairly low compared to the typical contemporary minicomputer, and registers were also sometimes used implicitly by instructions. While perfectly sensible for the assembly programmer, this made register allocation for compilers more complicated compared to more regular 16- and 32-bit processors such as the PDP-11, VAX, 68000, 32016 etc. On the other hand, it was more regular and orthogonal than ubiquitous but rather minimalistic 8-bit microprocessors such as the 6502, 6800, 6809, 8085, MCS-48, 8051 and other contemporary accumulator based machines. It was significantly easier to construct an efficient code generator for the 8086 design.
Another factor for this was that the 8086 also introduced some new instructions (not present in the 8080 and 8085) to better support stack based high level programming languages such as Pascal and PL/M; some of the more useful ones were push mem-op, and ret size, supporting the "pascal calling convention" directly. (Several others, such as push immed and enter, would be added in the subsequent 80186, 80286, and 80386 processors.)
The 8086 had a 64 KB of 8-bit (or alternatively 32 K-word of 16-bit) I/O space. A 64 KB (one segment) stack growing towards lower addresses is supported in hardware; 2-byte words are pushed to the stack and the stack top is pointed to by SS:SP. There are 256 interrupts, which can be invoked by both hardware and software. The interrupts can cascade, using the stack to store the return addresses.
8086 has a 16-bit flags register. Nine of these condition code flags are active, and indicate the current state of the processor: Carry flag (CF), Parity flag (PF), Auxiliary carry flag (AF), Zero flag (ZF), Sign flag (SF), Trap flag (TF), Interrupt flag (IF), Direction flag (DF), and Overflow flag (OF).
There are also four 16-bit segment registers (see figure) that allow the 8086 CPU to access one megabyte of memory in an unusual way. Rather than concatenating the segment register with the address register, as in most processors whose address space exceeded their register size, the 8086 shifts the 16-bit segment only four bits left before adding it to the 16-bit offset (16×segment + offset), therefore producing a 20-bit external (or effective or physical) address from the 32-bit segment:offset pair. As a result, each external address can be referred to by 212 = 4096 different segment:offset pairs.
|0110 1000 1000 0111 0000||Segment,||16 bits, shifted 4 bits left|
|+ 0011 0100 1010 1001||Offset,||16 bits|
|0110 1011 1101 0001 1001||Address,||20 bits|
Although considered complicated and cumbersome by many programmers, this scheme also has advantages; a small program (less than 64 KB) can be loaded starting at a fixed offset (such as 0000) in its own segment, avoiding the need for relocation, with at most 15 bytes of alignment waste.
Compilers for the 8086-family commonly support two types of pointer, near and far. Near pointers are 16-bit offsets implicitly associated with the program's code or data segment and so can be used only within parts of a program small enough to fit in one segment. Far pointers are 32-bit segment:offset pairs resolving to 20-bit external addresses. Some compilers also support huge pointers, which are like far pointers except that pointer arithmetic on a huge pointer treats it as a linear 20-bit pointer, while pointer arithmetic on a far pointer wraps around within its 16-bit offset without touching the segment part of the address.
To avoid the need to specify near and far on numerous pointers, data structures, and functions, compilers also support "memory models" which specify default pointer sizes. The tiny (max 64K), small (max 128K), compact (data > 64K), medium (code > 64K), large (code,data > 64K), and huge (individual arrays > 64K) models cover practical combinations of near, far, and huge pointers for code and data. The tiny model means that code and data are shared in a single segment, just as in most 8-bit based processors, and can be used to build .com-files for instance. Precompiled libraries often came in several versions compiled for different memory models.
According to Morse et al., the designers actually contemplated using an 8-bit shift (instead of 4-bit), in order to create a 16 MB physical address space. However, as this would have forced segments to begin on 256-byte boundaries, and 1 MB was considered very large for a microprocessor around 1976, the idea was dismissed. Also, there were not enough pins available on a low-cost 40-pin package for the additional four address bus pins.
In principle, the address space of the x86 series could have been extended in later processors by increasing the shift value, as long as applications obtained their segments from the operating system and did not make assumptions about the equivalence of different segment:offset pairs.[note 11] In practice the use of "huge" pointers and similar mechanisms was widespread and the flat 32-bit addressing made possible with the 32-bit offset registers in the 80386 eventually extended the limited addressing range in a more general way (see below).
Intel could have decided to implement memory in 16 bit words (which would have eliminated the BHE signal along with much of the address bus complexities already described). This would mean that all instruction object codes and data would have to be accessed in 16-bit units. Users of the 8080 long ago realised, in hindsight, that the processor makes very efficient use of its memory. By having a large number of 8-bit object codes, the 8080 produces object code as compact as some of the most powerful minicomputers on the market at the time.:5–26
If the 8086 is to retain 8-bit object codes and hence the efficient memory use of the 8080, then it cannot guarantee that (16-bit) opcodes and data will lie on an even-odd byte address boundary. The first 8-bit opcode will shift the next 8-bit instruction to an odd byte or a 16-bit instruction to an odd-even byte boundary. By implementing the BHE signal and the extra logic needed, the 8086 has allowed instructions to exist as 1-byte, 3-byte or any other odd byte object codes.:5–26
Simply put: this is a trade off. If memory addressing is simplified so that memory is only accessed in 16-bit units, memory will be used less efficiently. Intel decided to make the logic more complicated, but memory use more efficient. This was at a time when memory size was considerably smaller, and at a premium, than that which users are used to today.:5–26
Porting older software
Small programs could ignore the segmentation and just use plain 16-bit addressing. This allowed 8-bit software to be quite easily ported to the 8086. The authors of MS-DOS took advantage of this by providing an Application Programming Interface very similar to CP/M as well as including the simple .com executable file format, identical to CP/M. This was important when the 8086 and MS-DOS were new, because it allowed many existing CP/M (and other) applications to be quickly made available, greatly easing acceptance of the new platform.
The following 8086/8088 assembler source code is for a subroutine named
_memcpy that copies a block of data bytes of a given size from one location to another. The data block is copied one byte at a time, and the data movement and looping logic utilizes 16-bit operations.
; _memcpy(dst, src, len) ; Copy a block of memory from one location to another. ; ; Entry stack parameters ; [BP+6] = len, Number of bytes to copy ; [BP+4] = src, Address of source data block ; [BP+2] = dst, Address of target data block ; ; Return registers ; AX = Zero 0000:1000 org 1000h ; Start at 0000:1000h 0000:1000 _memcpy proc 0000:1000 55 push bp ; Set up the call frame 0000:1001 89 E5 mov bp,sp 0000:1003 06 push es ; Save ES 0000:1004 8B 4E 06 mov cx,[bp+6] ; Set CX = len 0000:1007 E3 11 jcxz done ; If len=0, return 0000:1009 8B 76 04 mov si,[bp+4] ; Set SI = src 0000:100C 8B 7E 02 mov di,[bp+2] ; Set DI = dst 0000:100F 1E push ds ; Set ES = DS 0000:1010 07 pop es 0000:1011 8A 04 loop mov al,[si] ; Load AL from [src] 0000:1013 88 05 mov [di],al ; Store AL to [dst] 0000:1015 46 inc si ; Increment src 0000:1016 47 inc di ; Increment dst 0000:1017 49 dec cx ; Decrement len 0000:1018 75 F7 jnz loop ; Repeat the loop 0000:101A 07 done pop es ; Restore ES 0000:101B 5D pop bp ; Restore previous call frame 0000:101C 29 C0 sub ax,ax ; Set AX = 0 0000:101E C3 ret ; Return 0000:101F end proc
The code above uses the BP (base pointer) register to establish a call frame, an area on the stack that contains all of the parameters and local variables for the execution of the subroutine. This kind of calling convention supports reentrant and recursive code, and has been used by most ALGOL-like languages since the late 1950s. The ES segment register is saved on the stack and replaced with the value of the DS segment register, so that the
AL instructions will operate within the same source and destination data segment. Before returning, the subroutine restores the previous value of the ES register.
The above routine is a rather cumbersome way to copy blocks of data. Provided the source and the destination blocks reside within single 65,536 byte segments (a requirement of the above routine), advantage can be taken of the 8086's block
MOV instructions. The loop section of the above can be replaced by:
0000:1011 F2 loop rep ; Repeat until CX=0 0000:1012 A5 movsw ; Move the data block
This copies the block of data one word at a time. The
REP instruction causes the following
MOVSW to repeat until CX=0, automatically incrementing SI and DI as it repeats. Alternatively the
MOVSD instructions can be used to copy single bytes or double words at a time. Most assemblers will assemble correctly if the
REP instruction is used as a prefix to
MOVSW as in
This routine will operate correctly if interrupted, because the program counter will continue to point to the
REP instruction until the block copy is completed. The copy will therefore continue from where it left off when the interrupt service routine returns control.
Although partly shadowed by other design choices in this particular chip, the multiplexed address and data buses limited performance slightly; transfers of 16-bit or 8-bit quantities were done in a four-clock memory access cycle, which was faster on 16-bit, although slower on 8-bit quantities, compared to many contemporary 8-bit based CPUs. As instructions varied from one to six bytes, fetch and execution were made concurrent and decoupled into separate units (as it remains in today's x86 processors): The bus interface unit fed the instruction stream to the execution unit through a 6-byte prefetch queue (a form of loosely coupled pipelining), speeding up operations on registers and immediates, while memory operations unfortunately became slower (four years later, this performance problem was fixed with the 80186 and 80286). However, the full (instead of partial) 16-bit architecture with a full width ALU meant that 16-bit arithmetic instructions could now be performed with a single ALU cycle (instead of two, via internal carry, as in the 8080 and 8085), speeding up such instructions considerably. Combined with orthogonalizations of operations versus operand-types and addressing modes, as well as other enhancements, this made the performance gain over the 8080 or 8085 fairly significant, despite cases where the older chips may be faster (see below).
|jump||register => 11 ; label => 15 ; condition,label => 16|
|integer multiply||70~160 (depending on operand data as well as size) including any EA|
|integer divide||80~190 (depending on operand data as well as size) including any EA|
- EA = time to compute effective address, ranging from 5 to 12 cycles.
- Timings are best case, depending on prefetch status, instruction alignment, and other factors.
As can be seen from these tables, operations on registers and immediates were fast (between 2 and 4 cycles), while memory-operand instructions and jumps were quite slow; jumps took more cycles than on the simple 8080 and 8085, and the 8088 (used in the IBM PC) was additionally hampered by its narrower bus. The reasons why most memory related instructions were slow were threefold:
- Loosely coupled fetch and execution units are efficient for instruction prefetch, but not for jumps and random data access (without special measures).
- No dedicated address calculation adder was afforded; the microcode routines had to use the main ALU for this (although there was a dedicated segment + offset adder).
- The address and data buses were multiplexed, forcing a slightly longer (33~50%) bus cycle than in typical contemporary 8-bit processors.
However, memory access performance was drastically enhanced with Intel's next generation chips. The 80186 and 80286 both had dedicated address calculation hardware, saving many cycles, and the 80286 also had separate (non-multiplexed) address and data buses.
The 8086/8088 could be connected to a mathematical coprocessor to add hardware/microcode-based floating point performance. The Intel 8087 was the standard math coprocessor for the 8086 and 8088, operating on 80-bit numbers. Manufacturers like Cyrix (8087-compatible) and Weitek (non 8087-compatible) eventually came up with high performance floating point co-processors that competed with the 8087 as well as with the subsequent, higher performing Intel 80387.
The clock frequency was originally limited to 5 MHz (IBM PC used 4.77 MHz, 4/3 the standard NTSC color burst frequency), but the last versions in HMOS were specified for 10 MHz. HMOS-III and CMOS versions were manufactured for a long time (at least a while into the 1990s) for embedded systems, although its successor, the 80186/80188 (which includes some on-chip peripherals), has been more popular for embedded use.
Derivatives and clones
Compatible—and, in many cases, enhanced—versions were manufactured by Fujitsu, Harris/Intersil, OKI, Siemens AG, Texas Instruments, NEC, Mitsubishi, AMD. For example, the NEC V20 and NEC V30 pair were hardware compatible with the 8088 and 8086 even though NEC made original Intel clones μPD8088D and μPD8086D, respectively, but incorporated the instruction set of the 80186 along with some (but not all) of the 80186 speed enhancements, providing a drop-in capability to upgrade both instruction set and processing speed without manufacturers having to modify their designs. Such relatively simple and low-power 8086-compatible processors in CMOS are still used in embedded systems.
i8088 and i8086 were respectively the cores of the Soviet-made PC-compatible EC1831 and EC1832 desktops (EC1831 is the EC identification of IZOT 1037C and EC1832 is the EC identification of IZOT 1036C, developed and manufactured in Bulgaria). However, EC1832 computer (IZOT 1036C) had significant hardware differences from its authentic prototype, and the data/address bus circuitry was designed independently of Intel products.[verification needed] EC1832 was the first PC compatible computer with dynamic bus sizing (US Pat. No 4,831,514). Later some of the ES1832 principles were adopted in PS/2 (US Pat. No 5,548,786) and some other machines (UK Patent Application, Publication No. GB-A-2211325, Published June. 28, 1989).
The 8086 and 8088 support two hardware modes: maximum mode and minimum mode. Maximum mode is for large applications such as multiprocessing and is also required to support the 8087 coprocessor. The mode is usually hard-wired into the circuit and cannot be changed by software. Specifically, pin #33 (MN/MX) is either wired to voltage or to ground to determine the mode. Changing the state of pin #33 changes the function of certain other pins, most of which have to do with how the CPU handles the (local) bus. The IBM PC and PC/XT use an Intel 8088 running in maximum mode, which allows the CPU to work with an optional 8087 coprocessor installed in the math coprocessor socket on the PC or PC/XT mainboard. (The PC and PC/XT may require Max mode for other reasons, such as perhaps to support the DMA controller.)
- Intel 8237: direct memory access (DMA) controller
- Intel 8251: USART
- Intel 8253: programmable interval timer
- Intel 8255: programmable peripheral interface
- Intel 8259: programmable interrupt controller
- Intel 8279: keyboard/display controller
- Intel 8282/8283: 8-Bit latch
- Intel 8284: clock generator
- Intel 8286/8287: bidirectional 8-Bit driver
- Intel 8288: bus controller
- Intel 8289: bus arbiter
Microcomputers using the 8086
- The Xerox NoteTaker was one of the earliest portable computer designs in 1978 and used three 8086 chips (as CPU, graphics processor, and i/o processor), but never entered commercial production.
- Seattle Computer Products shipped S-100 bus based 8086 systems (SCP200B) as early as November 1979.
- The Norwegian Mycron 2000, introduced in 1980.
- One of the most influential microcomputers of all, the IBM PC, used the Intel 8088, a version of the 8086 with an eight-bit data bus (as mentioned above).
- The first Compaq Deskpro used an 8086 running at 7.14 MHz, (?) but was capable of running add-in cards designed for the 4.77 MHz IBM PC XT.
- An 8 MHz 8086 was used in the AT&T 6300 PC (built by Olivetti), an IBM PC-compatible desktop microcomputer. The M24 / PC 6300 has IBM PC/XT compatible 8-bit expansion slots, but some of them have a proprietary extension providing the full 16-bit data bus of the 8086 CPU (similar in concept to the 16-bit slots of the IBM PC AT, but different in the design details, and physically incompatible).
- The IBM PS/2 models 25 and 30 were built with an 8 MHz 8086.
- The Amstrad/Schneider PC1512, PC1640, PC2086, PC3086 and PC5086 all used 8086 CPUs at 8 MHz.
- The NEC PC-9801.
- The Tandy 1000 SL-series and RL machines used 8086 CPUs.
- The IBM Displaywriter word processing machine and the Wang Professional Computer, manufactured by Wang Laboratories, also used the 8086.
- NASA used original 8086 CPUs on equipment for ground-based maintenance of the Space Shuttle Discovery until the end of the space shuttle program in 2011. This decision was made to prevent software regression that might result from upgrading or from switching to imperfect clones.
- KAMAN Process and Area Radiation Monitors
- Fewer TTL buffers, latches, multiplexers (although the amount of TTL logic was not drastically reduced). It also permitted the use of cheap 8080-family ICs, where the 8254 CTC, 8255 PIO, and 8259 PIC were used in the IBM PC design. In addition, it made PCB layout simpler and boards cheaper, as well as demanding fewer (1- or 4-bit wide) DRAM chips.
- using enhancement load PMOS logic (demanding 14V, achieving TTL-compatibility by having VCC at +5V and VDD at -9V)
- using non-saturated enhancement load NMOS logic (demanding a higher gate voltage for the load transistor-gates)
- made possible with depletion load nMOS logic (the 8085 was later made using HMOS processing, just like the 8086)
- Rev.0 of the instruction set and architecture was ready in about three months, according to Morse.
- Using rubylith, light boards, rulers, electric erasers, and a digitizer (according to Jenny Hernandez, member of the 8086 design team, in a statement made on Intel's web-page for its 25th birthday).
- 8086 used less microcode than many competitors' designs, such as the MC68000 and others
- Fast static RAMs in MOS technology (as fast as bipolar RAMs) was an important product for Intel during this period.
- CHMOS is Intel's name for CMOS circuits manufactured using processing steps very similar to HMOS.
- Other members of the design team were Peter A.Stoll and Jenny Hernandez.
- Some 80186 clones did change the shift value, but were never commonly used in desktop computers.
- "Microprocessor Hall of Fame". Intel. Archived from the original on 2007-07-06. Retrieved 2007-08-11.
- Official Intel iAPX 286 programmers' manual (page 1-1)
- Birth of a Standard: The Intel 8086 Microprocessor. Thirty years ago, Intel released the 8086 processor, introducing the x86 architecture that underlies every PC-Windows, Mac, or Linux-produced today, PC World, June 17, 2008
- Randall L. Geiger, Phillip E. Allen, Noel R. Strader VLSI design techniques for analog and digital circuits, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1990, ISBN 0-07-023253-9, page 779 "Random Logic vs. Structured Logic Forms", illustration of use of "random" describing CPU control logic
- Intel 8008 to 8086 by Stephen P. Morse et al.
- Osborne 16 bit Processor Handbook (Adam Osborne & Gerry Kane) ISBN 0-931988-43-8
- Microsoft Macro Assembler 5.0 Reference Manual. Microsoft Corporation. 1987. "Timings and encodings in this manual are used with permission of Intel and come from the following publications: Intel Corporation. iAPX 86, 88, 186 and 188 User's Manual, Programmer's Reference, Santa Clara, Calif. 1986." (Similarly for iAPX 286, 80386, 80387.)
- Zachmann, Mark (August 23, 1982). "Flaws in IBM Personal Computer frustrate critic". InfoWorld (Palo Alto, CA: Popular Computing) 4 (33): 57–58. ISSN 0199-6649. "the IBM Displaywriter is noticeably more expensive than other industrial micros that use the 8086."
- For Old Parts, NASA Boldly Goes ... on eBay, May 12, 2002.
- Kaman Tech. Manual
- Architecture-Of-8086 and pin at scanftree.com
- Intel datasheets
- List of 8086 CPUs and their clones at CPUworld.com
- 8086 Pinouts
- Maximum Mode Interface
- The 8086 User's manual October 1979 INTEL Corporation (PDF document)
- 8086 program codes using emu8086 (Version 4.08) Emulator
- Intel 8086/80186 emulator written in C, this file is part of a larger PC emulator