Talk:HP FOCUS

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Computer hardware task force.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

First 32-bit chip?[edit]

I'm not sure that this was the first 32-bit single-chip CPU — the NS320xx article claims otherwise. --StuartBrady (Talk) 21:21, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See NS320xx this one was available as NS32016 in the late 1970s but had a 16-bit external databus ... The NS32032 was the 32 Bit variant, but arrived in 1984.

The Focus arrived 1982 and had a 32-bit interconnect between CPU/MMU and CPU/IOP.

There is an other difference: the Focus CPU was a RISC CPU. —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Nmoas (talk • contribs)

Fair enough. (Although, actually, stack architecture != RISC.) --StuartBrady (Talk) 11:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Although, actually, stack architecture != RISC.) Why not? There is no "stack" limit for Risc CPU's, some/many are stack architectures and implement push and pop commands for saving multible registers and to de/in-crease the stack pointer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nmoas (talk • contribs)

Well, one of the defining characteristics of RISC is a large general purpose register file. You could argue that register windows are sort of like a stack, but that would be missing the point. Really, it's not RISC. --StuartBrady (Talk) 15:28, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]