Semiconductor & Computer Engineering
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
=== What is WikiChip? === | === What is WikiChip? === | ||
| − | WikiChip is a semantic computer engineering wiki. | + | WikiChip is a semantic computer engineering wiki. Our goal is to document all [[integrated circuits]] of interest, including [[microprocessors]], [[microcontrollers]], and [[graphics processors]] - including all old and obsolete chips! Additionally WikiChip attempts to document the [[microarchitecture]], [[instruction set architecture|architecture]], and [[instruction set]] that they implement. We also try to address general computer-related topics, concepts, and methodologies. Most of the information on WikiChip has formal semantics attached to the values so they can be analyzed, compared and contrasted efficiently by humans as well as machines. If you're coming here to do research or develop an application based on WikiChip's data, check out [[WikiChip:semantic wikichip]] for more details. |
| − | === How WikiChip | + | === How is WikiChip organized? === |
| − | Unlike most wikis out there that use a flat article structure, WikiChip uses a hierarchy structure to organize articles. For example, a particular processor model is a sub-article of a processor family (e.g. {{intel|Core i7EE}} '''→''' {{intel|Core i7-6950X}}). Likewise, each processor family is a sub-article of the company it's most tightly associated with (e.g. [[AMD]] '''→''' {{amd|K5}}). | + | Unlike most wikis out there that use a flat article structure, WikiChip uses a hierarchy structure to organize articles. For example, a particular processor model is a sub-article of a processor family (e.g. {{intel|Core i7EE}} '''→''' {{intel|Core i7-6950X}}). Likewise, each processor family is a sub-article of the company it's most tightly associated with (e.g. [[AMD]] '''→''' {{amd|K5}}). For more importation check out our [[WikiChip:naming conventions]]. |
| + | |||
| + | :Example: | ||
| + | :* [[AMD]] '''→''' [[Athlon MP]] '''→''' [[Athlon MP 1500+]] | ||
| + | :** [[amd/athlon_mp/amp1500dms3c]] | ||
| + | :* [[Intel]] '''→''' [[intel/microarchitectures|Microarchitectures]] '''→''' [[Broadwell]] | ||
| + | :** [[intel/microarchitectures/broadwell]] | ||
| + | :* [[Qualcomm]] '''→''' {{qualcomm|MSM6xxx}} '''→''' {{qualcomm|MSM6275}} | ||
| + | :** [[qualcomm/msm6xxx/msm6275]] | ||
=== How do I get started? === | === How do I get started? === | ||
| Line 13: | Line 21: | ||
=== Why document obsolete chips? === | === Why document obsolete chips? === | ||
| − | While they may be obsolete as far as real-world application is concerned. They are still a subject of great research and interest among researchers and hobbyists alike. The decisions engineers made back in those early days of microprocessors and microcontrollers have had direct impact on how we design and think about things today. Likewise many of the ISAs we use everyday (such as x86) can trace their roots to those early chips. | + | While they may be obsolete as far as real-world application is concerned. They are still a subject of great research and interest among researchers and hobbyists alike. The decisions engineers made back in those early days of microprocessors and microcontrollers have had direct impact on how we design and think about things today. Likewise many of the ISAs we use everyday (such as x86) can trace their roots to those early chips. There is a lot to learn about the design philosophies of different groups of engineers. There is just as much to learn by examining failed designs as by examining highly successful designs. If we choose to only document notable or mainstream designs and products we risk losing valuable knowledge and opening us up to the possibility of repeating these same mistakes. |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | There is a lot to learn about the design philosophies of different groups of engineers. There is just as much to learn by examining failed designs as by examining highly successful designs. If we choose to only document notable or mainstream designs and products we risk losing valuable knowledge and opening us up to the possibility of repeating these same mistakes. | ||
Revision as of 18:17, 8 January 2017
WikiChip FAQ
This page is work in progress.
Contents
What is WikiChip?
WikiChip is a semantic computer engineering wiki. Our goal is to document all integrated circuits of interest, including microprocessors, microcontrollers, and graphics processors - including all old and obsolete chips! Additionally WikiChip attempts to document the microarchitecture, architecture, and instruction set that they implement. We also try to address general computer-related topics, concepts, and methodologies. Most of the information on WikiChip has formal semantics attached to the values so they can be analyzed, compared and contrasted efficiently by humans as well as machines. If you're coming here to do research or develop an application based on WikiChip's data, check out WikiChip:semantic wikichip for more details.
How is WikiChip organized?
Unlike most wikis out there that use a flat article structure, WikiChip uses a hierarchy structure to organize articles. For example, a particular processor model is a sub-article of a processor family (e.g. Core i7EE → Core i7-6950X). Likewise, each processor family is a sub-article of the company it's most tightly associated with (e.g. AMD → K5). For more importation check out our WikiChip:naming conventions.
- Example:
How do I get started?
See WikiChip:welcome.
Why document obsolete chips?
While they may be obsolete as far as real-world application is concerned. They are still a subject of great research and interest among researchers and hobbyists alike. The decisions engineers made back in those early days of microprocessors and microcontrollers have had direct impact on how we design and think about things today. Likewise many of the ISAs we use everyday (such as x86) can trace their roots to those early chips. There is a lot to learn about the design philosophies of different groups of engineers. There is just as much to learn by examining failed designs as by examining highly successful designs. If we choose to only document notable or mainstream designs and products we risk losing valuable knowledge and opening us up to the possibility of repeating these same mistakes.