Talk:Hitachi 6309

Computing High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Computer hardware task force.

This article is based on material taken from the Free On-line Dictionary of Computing prior to 1 November 2008 and incorporated under the "relicensing" terms of the GFDL, version 1.3 or later.

Hirotsugu Kakugawa

I'm putting his name back with the proper spelling. I'm not fluent in Japanese by any means, but "Kakugawa" is a sensible spelling and Kakagawa is not. Please refer to the link on the page where his original postings are archived on Google Groups. -- Lamune 03:25, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, someone beat me to it. :) Lamune 03:27, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Intro Paragraph

I rewrote it, I think it flows better this time. You be the judge. 00:21, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

speed comparisons

It would be interesting if someone posted a cpu comparison to other cpus such as the 68000, 6502 ect. If somebody does it, I hope it is acurate and isn't rigged to make one of them look better than it is. Cpu comparison charts are can be so easily manipulated sometimes.

From: 75.57.187.99:

Compared to other less related cpus, it is somewhat faster than a 68000 clocked at equal speeds, but is much slower than a 32-bit SuperH or an ARM risc cpu.

I don't think this should stay unless a good reference is cited. Tlindner (talk) 04:31, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For object code which takes advantage of the efficient addressing modes (present in the original), and which doesn't take advantage of 32 or 64 bit advantages of more modern processors, a fast 6309 will do quite well. For anything which depends on I/O speed, modern buses and memory speeds will leave it in the dust. Emulation is likely the best way to go... 69.118.209.149 (talk) 06:19, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, why do you always delete what I write less than 5 minutes after I write it, yet you let other people write retarded lies all the time and do anything about it, and keep it up so long that 200 websites already say the same information, and you delete my stuff after 2 minutes?

production question

Is the Hitachi 6309 still manufactured today? Retailers seem to carry them in the thousands. This would be a valuable clarification to this wiki page IMHO. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.66.219.167 (talk) 01:33, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hitachi 6309. 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/20120330234331/http://www.concentric.net/~alxevans/6309/index.html to http://www.concentric.net/~Alxevans/6309/index.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) 13:39, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Static vs Dynamic

Someone a long time ago claimed that the device is "fully static": https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hitachi_6309&oldid=48448210 That's wrong. The datasheet specifies a minimum clock frequency of 2MHz for both the HD68B09 and the HD68C09 and they will lose their state when the clock speed is too low. Source: My eyes. But in all seriousness: https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/474253/fully-static-hd63b09ep-loses-state-when-clock-is-paused I changed the article to reflect that, but I am unsure whether my writing style is appropriate. I would appreciate it if somebody could check that.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Hitachi.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:22, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of grammatical errors

In certain parts of this article, there are many grammatical errors, especially subject-verb disagreement and missing articles. It sounds like someone who does not speak English as a first language. They also seem to have added sections that definitely need citations or should be removed. I'm just going to make note of this so I can come back and work on it when I have time -- in the meantime, anyone should feel free to fix the errors and or remove claims that don't have citations if none can be found. The sections regarding programming "gurus'" opinions in particular need cleanup. MrAureliusR_Talk! 07:11, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]