Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Membership Ranks: Why is there a 65832?

cubist said:
What Apple machine ever used a 65832? Did the chip even exist? I don't recall any Apple machine with a 68010 either...
Click to expand...

I don't know how much it was actually used, but Western Design Center, which originally designed the 65816 microprocessor, created the 65832 as a 32-bit version to the 65816. It was supposed to go into the Apple IIgs I believe, don't know if it ever did or not...

As for the 68010, it never became common as there was extra costs and complexity involved, with marginal benefits, which made companies shy away from it. It had a marginal speed boost over the 68000, but most vendors held out until the 60820. I believe Apple may have briefly used this processor in the Macintosh II, but I could be wrong...
 
cubist said:
What Apple machine ever used a 65832? Did the chip even exist? I don't recall any Apple machine with a 68010 either...
Click to expand...

To give you an idea of the chip's obscurity, search for '65832' in Google. The first two results are about the parts of speech and the third is this thread. Searching for 'what mac used 65832' reveals that the first three results are from this thread. :D

Result number 4 is some song parody of the Apple ]['s existence (Apple2History.org). At the bottom of the page, there are some citations. Number 12 pertains to the matter at hand:

apple2history.org said:
The company that had made the 16-bit 65816 was at one time willing to make a more advanced 32-bit processor, the 65832. However, Apple's unwillingness to commit to creating a computer that would use that processor doomed any potential for this company to design that processor.
Click to expand...

This suggests that 65832 was never even designed!

More details can be found here.
 
There never was a 65832. There's no evidence that I'm aware of that it was designed or even architected.

Bill Mensch offered to design and build one if Apple wanted one. Apple declined.
 
kentd said:
There never was a 65832. There's no evidence that I'm aware of that it was designed or even architected.

Bill Mensch offered to design and build one if Apple wanted one. Apple declined.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think that's what the article I read said.
 
I just became a 65832 2 posts ago. Since I only get about 5 posts to enjoy this rare rank, I thought it would be only logical and fitting to use up one of those posts in this discussion. :cool:
 
~Shard~ said:
I just became a 65832 2 posts ago. Since I only get about 5 posts to enjoy this rare rank, I thought it would be only logical and fitting to use up one of those posts in this discussion. :cool:
Click to expand...
Well if you'd posted all your recent replies in threads bound for the wasteland, or in the political forum (same difference) you'd be able to make this rank last forever.

Heck, Voltron was able to make newbie status last for 500+ posts, yet only have 1 post count.

https://forums.macrumors.com/members/33927/
 
Sun Baked said:
Well if you'd posted all your recent replies in threads bound for the wasteland, or in the political forum (same difference) you'd be able to make this rank last forever.

Heck, Voltron was able to make newbie status last for 500+ posts, yet only have 1 post count.

https://forums.macrumors.com/members/33927/
Click to expand...

Nope, too late! ;) I thought it would also be fitting to lose the rank in the thread as well. Ah well, easy come, easy go! That's really impressive with Voltron though. If I was him though, I would want my posts to count so I could shed that newbie status, but whatever works for ya! If he loves spending his time in the political forums then by all means, Lord knows someone has to do it! ;)
 
I think its rather important that we get some new ranks beyond the 601 sometime soon as well. Myself, for example: I expect to reach the 601 status at about Christmas of 2018. I'd hate to get there and have nothing else to look forward too. . . ;)
 
dvdh said:
I think its rather important that we get some new ranks beyond the 601 sometime soon as well. Myself, for example: I expect to reach the 601 status at about Christmas of 2018. I'd hate to get there and have nothing else to look forward too. . . ;)
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree - what would be after the 601 anyway? There were a few flavors, weren't there, like a 601+, 603/603e, 604/604e, etc.? Then I guess you could get into the PowerPC 750s and of course the 74xx series, which would no doubt give you about 5 or 6 rankings before moving onto the 970/970fx. :cool:
 
dvdh said:
I think its rather important that we get some new ranks beyond the 601 sometime soon as well. Myself, for example: I expect to reach the 601 status at about Christmas of 2018. I'd hate to get there and have nothing else to look forward too. . . ;)
Click to expand...

Don't estimate...Doctor Q can tell you when you'll hit 601 down to the millisecond. :D
 
~Shard~ said:
That's not exactly how it would work - the member rankings are based on processor architectures, not speeds. So technically, the only new rankings after 601 could be G3, G4 and G5 (regardless of if you're talking about a 1.6 GHz G5 or a 3 GHz G5). Arn would just have to set ther post counts high so that it would take members ages to actually achieve those levels.
Click to expand...
Hmm, my 604e system would feel sad to know that you left it out Shard ;)

Still, Arn could prolly reach a G6 before IBM does... :D
 
~Shard~ said:
Ah, but you read my older post, before I became "better educated" - check out my post about 4 above this one. ;) :cool:
Click to expand...
Yeah, yeah, what can I say? I just made member status, I'm a little slow. Woowoo, no more newbie status! :cool:
 
Revive an old thread time!

Just hit 65832 myself, so this will be one of my 4 posts that I'll make while at this rank. Like ~Shard~, I felt it appropriate to post in this thread.

Time to update the ranks, too. I mean, we only have one person at G4 rank, and nobody at 604 or G3 rank (other than mods or Demi-Gods who have chosen not to use the processor rank.) I suggest a new ranking system that gets rid of the unused processors altogether, and simplifies, and gets people to progress through now-obsolete-processor ranks faster:

6502: 1-99
65816: 100-499
68000: 500-999
68020: 1000-1499
68030: 1500-1999
68040: 2000-2499
601: 2500-2999
603: 3000-3499
604: 3500-3999
G3: 4000-4999
G4: 5000-5999
G5: 6000-7499
Core Solo: 7500-7999
Core Duo: 8000-9999
Core 2 Duo: 10000-19999 (At present, only 4 people would be using this rank.)
Xeon (dual-core): 20000-29999 (Only one would be using this rank.)
Xeon (quad-core): 30000+ (Even mad jew is half a year away at his current posting rate.)
 
ehurtley said:
Just hit 65832 myself, so this will be one of my 4 posts that I'll make while at this rank.
Click to expand...

This is an old thread... but I never commented on it.

But just to clarify, the 65832 was a rumored chip to be used in the Apple //gs+ (also rumored) and was never actually released.

arn
 
Since we have Arn here now its a good time to ask if you ever thought the post counts would ever have gotten this high when you first started the rankings.
 
MacNut said:
Since we have Arn here now its a good time to ask if you ever thought the post counts would ever have gotten this high when you first started the rankings.
Click to expand...

nope... not at all. there are a lot of things I might have done differently if I had known things would grow this big.

The processor number decision was literally an off the top of my head decision when I came to that blank on vbulletin's settings.

arn
 
arn said:
nope... not at all. there are a lot of things I might have done differently if I had known things would grow this big.

The processor number decision was literally an off the top of my head decision when I came to that blank on vbulletin's settings.

arn
Click to expand...
Could you update the list or is it a done deal 6 years in.
 
If the ranks match CPU longevity, I wouldn't fancy getting to be a "G4", you'd be stuck on that for years! :p

I wouldn't mind being a "mobile G5" myself though. Very mysterious...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back