VAX hardware

[Chris Torek]

In article <91 at tucson.sie.arizona.edu> bill at tucson.sie.arizona.edu
(Bill Ganoe) writes:
>The [4.3BSD-Reno supported] VAX list included 730, 750, 78x, 82x0, and 86x0.
>We have got to upgrade from our 750 ... [but] the VAXes we [can use], e.g.
>8550, aren't explicitly included in the above list.
>
>My question is, for the purposes of installing 4.3BSD and 4.4BSD
>(Reno isn't really appropriate for the user community here), how
>different are the various VAXes in the 8xxx series?

The 8200, 8250, 8300, and 8350 are identical except that the -50
versions have faster CPUs (~1.5 VUPS rather than ~1.0 VUPS) and the
83-0 versions have two CPUs.  My code will discover the second CPU and
promptly ignore it.  Of course, the 8[23][05]0 series is unsupported.
(In fact, all the machines quoted above are unsupported).

I forget what the difference is for the 8500 series, but I remember
that it is real and would require some changes to the autoconfiguration
code, at least.

The 8700 and 8800 have a different main bus (the MI bus) and would
require still more changes.  The major problem here is that they have
BI adapters (DB88s) that provide more than one BI bus; making 4.3-Reno
run on two BIs could be done with the same trick used on the 86x0, but
at this point things are getting very messy.

The 6000 series uses yet a different main bus (the XMI) and the CPU
looks like a Microvax-3.

Your best bet, if you have to get a VAX, is to get a 3200 or 3600 or
whatever-it-is-numbered-these-days with a Q-bus and a Q-to-Uni-bus
box if you need to support old Unibus peripherals.  Anyway, this is
the only VAX hardware on which 4.3-Reno runs that is also still
supported by DEC.

If you can dump the VAX, HP9000/300 workstations give much better
price/performance.
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163)
Domain:	chris at cs.umd.edu	Path:	uunet!mimsy!chris
	(New campus phone system, active sometime soon: +1 301 405 2750)