Motorola 6845 and bitwise graphics
I'm curious about how graphics were drawn on systems using the Motorola 6845. I understand this was used in the CGA? If so, did the 6845 really work bitwise, was the bitwise graphics entirely separate, or did they use changing character sets on the fly to represent different patterns?
cga
asked May 13 at 12:11
Maury MarkowitzMaury Markowitz
3,430629
add a comment |
I'm curious about how graphics were drawn on systems using the Motorola 6845. I understand this was used in the CGA? If so, did the 6845 really work bitwise, was the bitwise graphics entirely separate, or did they use changing character sets on the fly to represent different patterns?
cga
asked May 13 at 12:11
Maury MarkowitzMaury Markowitz
3,430629
add a comment |
I'm curious about how graphics were drawn on systems using the Motorola 6845. I understand this was used in the CGA? If so, did the 6845 really work bitwise, was the bitwise graphics entirely separate, or did they use changing character sets on the fly to represent different patterns?
cga
asked May 13 at 12:11
Maury MarkowitzMaury Markowitz
3,430629
I'm curious about how graphics were drawn on systems using the Motorola 6845. I understand this was used in the CGA? If so, did the 6845 really work bitwise, was the bitwise graphics entirely separate, or did they use changing character sets on the fly to represent different patterns?
cga
cga
asked May 13 at 12:11
Maury MarkowitzMaury Markowitz
3,430629
asked May 13 at 12:11
Maury MarkowitzMaury Markowitz
3,430629
asked May 13 at 12:11
Maury MarkowitzMaury Markowitz
3,430629
asked May 13 at 12:11
Maury MarkowitzMaury Markowitz
3,430629
asked May 13 at 12:11
Maury MarkowitzMaury Markowitz
3,430629
3,430629
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Basically the 6845 was a bunch of counter registers, which you could program by defining end values (and sometimes start values), and use to generate RAM addresses and CRT sync signals. There was also a separate row address, so the original intention clearly was for character based displays: With a bit of additional components, you'd read some RAM content describing a character into a latch, and then you'd use this to index a ROM describing the pixel pattern for that character. Which you'd load into a shift register and shift out to the video DAC.
But of course then people also thought of ways to use this to display bit graphics. E.g. with a "character height" of 1, and no ROM access, and piping to RAM contents directly out of the shift registers. Or other variants for color.
And you could have configuration bits that control which variant of external components to use (with ROM lookup, without ROM lookup, with color table lookup).
And so, and so on. Bit the differences was all in the additional components, so "the 6845 worked bitwise" etc. doesn't really make sense.
The chip was quite successful, and used in many different ways, and the registers used ended up in the CGA, EGA, VGA etc. cards (with various extensions), and today's graphics card still have a legacy mode with this register layout. But the 6845 by itself still only is a bunch of counters.
In the 6845 data sheet, there's an example for additional components to create a character-based display, and you can read up on the details of operation.
answered May 13 at 13:41
dirktdirkt
9,65512647
Most excellent. So was memory bandwidth a problem if you did things bitwise? Or did it include some sort of "stuffing" system?
– Maury Markowitz
May 13 at 13:54
1
The "stuffing" system was the shift register I mentioned - RAM wasn't fast enough at that time to read memory every pixel (say, for 80x25 characters with 8x9 pixels per character), so e.g. you'd read 8 pixels at once, and then shift them out. Same for bit graphics.
– dirkt
May 13 at 13:57
The 6845 was limited to 127 rows per screen, so a character height of 1 wouldn't work. Instead, 6845-based bitmap displays would use the 6845's row output to select among several partial bitmaps of 127 or fewer lines each, which would then be displayed interleaved.
– supercat
May 13 at 21:20
On some machines that use the 6845 - certainly the Amstrad CPC and the Acorn BBC Micro - it's possible to get past the 127 line limit by changing register values mid-frame. I'm not sure how feasible that would be on a PC with a CGA card though.
– Matthew Barber
May 14 at 6:36
@supercat: I vaguely remember that some bitmap graphic modes worked by setting character height to 1; not sure about the context (it may have been a modified 6845 design that has become part of an integrated graphics card, with the total line counter width increased). Anyhow, the alternative is to set it to a power of two, and use the row address pins to address the RAM.
– dirkt
May 14 at 6:40
|
show 2 more comments
CGA and Hercules Graphics use the 6845. In graphics mode, each pixel is controlled individually, with no involvement from the character generator.
Graphics mode is controlled by bit 1 of the 03D8h control register; when it’s set, the framebuffer is treated as containing bitmap information, and when it’s cleared, the framebuffer is processed by the character generator. The bitmap layout in CGA isn’t linear; even rows come first, followed by odd rows (offset by 8 KiB). Pixels are packed, four pixels per byte in low resolution, eight pixels per byte in high resolution. Hercules has a similar interleaved layout, with four banks instead of two.
This page has lots of details on CGA.
answered May 13 at 13:40
Stephen KittStephen Kitt
43.8k8183188
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "648"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f10996%2fmotorola-6845-and-bitwise-graphics%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Basically the 6845 was a bunch of counter registers, which you could program by defining end values (and sometimes start values), and use to generate RAM addresses and CRT sync signals. There was also a separate row address, so the original intention clearly was for character based displays: With a bit of additional components, you'd read some RAM content describing a character into a latch, and then you'd use this to index a ROM describing the pixel pattern for that character. Which you'd load into a shift register and shift out to the video DAC.
But of course then people also thought of ways to use this to display bit graphics. E.g. with a "character height" of 1, and no ROM access, and piping to RAM contents directly out of the shift registers. Or other variants for color.
And you could have configuration bits that control which variant of external components to use (with ROM lookup, without ROM lookup, with color table lookup).
And so, and so on. Bit the differences was all in the additional components, so "the 6845 worked bitwise" etc. doesn't really make sense.
The chip was quite successful, and used in many different ways, and the registers used ended up in the CGA, EGA, VGA etc. cards (with various extensions), and today's graphics card still have a legacy mode with this register layout. But the 6845 by itself still only is a bunch of counters.
In the 6845 data sheet, there's an example for additional components to create a character-based display, and you can read up on the details of operation.
answered May 13 at 13:41
dirktdirkt
9,65512647
Most excellent. So was memory bandwidth a problem if you did things bitwise? Or did it include some sort of "stuffing" system?
– Maury Markowitz
May 13 at 13:54
1
The "stuffing" system was the shift register I mentioned - RAM wasn't fast enough at that time to read memory every pixel (say, for 80x25 characters with 8x9 pixels per character), so e.g. you'd read 8 pixels at once, and then shift them out. Same for bit graphics.
– dirkt
May 13 at 13:57
The 6845 was limited to 127 rows per screen, so a character height of 1 wouldn't work. Instead, 6845-based bitmap displays would use the 6845's row output to select among several partial bitmaps of 127 or fewer lines each, which would then be displayed interleaved.
– supercat
May 13 at 21:20
On some machines that use the 6845 - certainly the Amstrad CPC and the Acorn BBC Micro - it's possible to get past the 127 line limit by changing register values mid-frame. I'm not sure how feasible that would be on a PC with a CGA card though.
– Matthew Barber
May 14 at 6:36
@supercat: I vaguely remember that some bitmap graphic modes worked by setting character height to 1; not sure about the context (it may have been a modified 6845 design that has become part of an integrated graphics card, with the total line counter width increased). Anyhow, the alternative is to set it to a power of two, and use the row address pins to address the RAM.
– dirkt
May 14 at 6:40
|
show 2 more comments
Basically the 6845 was a bunch of counter registers, which you could program by defining end values (and sometimes start values), and use to generate RAM addresses and CRT sync signals. There was also a separate row address, so the original intention clearly was for character based displays: With a bit of additional components, you'd read some RAM content describing a character into a latch, and then you'd use this to index a ROM describing the pixel pattern for that character. Which you'd load into a shift register and shift out to the video DAC.
But of course then people also thought of ways to use this to display bit graphics. E.g. with a "character height" of 1, and no ROM access, and piping to RAM contents directly out of the shift registers. Or other variants for color.
And you could have configuration bits that control which variant of external components to use (with ROM lookup, without ROM lookup, with color table lookup).
And so, and so on. Bit the differences was all in the additional components, so "the 6845 worked bitwise" etc. doesn't really make sense.
The chip was quite successful, and used in many different ways, and the registers used ended up in the CGA, EGA, VGA etc. cards (with various extensions), and today's graphics card still have a legacy mode with this register layout. But the 6845 by itself still only is a bunch of counters.
In the 6845 data sheet, there's an example for additional components to create a character-based display, and you can read up on the details of operation.
answered May 13 at 13:41
dirktdirkt
9,65512647
Most excellent. So was memory bandwidth a problem if you did things bitwise? Or did it include some sort of "stuffing" system?
– Maury Markowitz
May 13 at 13:54
1
The "stuffing" system was the shift register I mentioned - RAM wasn't fast enough at that time to read memory every pixel (say, for 80x25 characters with 8x9 pixels per character), so e.g. you'd read 8 pixels at once, and then shift them out. Same for bit graphics.
– dirkt
May 13 at 13:57
The 6845 was limited to 127 rows per screen, so a character height of 1 wouldn't work. Instead, 6845-based bitmap displays would use the 6845's row output to select among several partial bitmaps of 127 or fewer lines each, which would then be displayed interleaved.
– supercat
May 13 at 21:20
On some machines that use the 6845 - certainly the Amstrad CPC and the Acorn BBC Micro - it's possible to get past the 127 line limit by changing register values mid-frame. I'm not sure how feasible that would be on a PC with a CGA card though.
– Matthew Barber
May 14 at 6:36
@supercat: I vaguely remember that some bitmap graphic modes worked by setting character height to 1; not sure about the context (it may have been a modified 6845 design that has become part of an integrated graphics card, with the total line counter width increased). Anyhow, the alternative is to set it to a power of two, and use the row address pins to address the RAM.
– dirkt
May 14 at 6:40
|
show 2 more comments
Basically the 6845 was a bunch of counter registers, which you could program by defining end values (and sometimes start values), and use to generate RAM addresses and CRT sync signals. There was also a separate row address, so the original intention clearly was for character based displays: With a bit of additional components, you'd read some RAM content describing a character into a latch, and then you'd use this to index a ROM describing the pixel pattern for that character. Which you'd load into a shift register and shift out to the video DAC.
But of course then people also thought of ways to use this to display bit graphics. E.g. with a "character height" of 1, and no ROM access, and piping to RAM contents directly out of the shift registers. Or other variants for color.
And you could have configuration bits that control which variant of external components to use (with ROM lookup, without ROM lookup, with color table lookup).
And so, and so on. Bit the differences was all in the additional components, so "the 6845 worked bitwise" etc. doesn't really make sense.
The chip was quite successful, and used in many different ways, and the registers used ended up in the CGA, EGA, VGA etc. cards (with various extensions), and today's graphics card still have a legacy mode with this register layout. But the 6845 by itself still only is a bunch of counters.
In the 6845 data sheet, there's an example for additional components to create a character-based display, and you can read up on the details of operation.
answered May 13 at 13:41
dirktdirkt
9,65512647
Basically the 6845 was a bunch of counter registers, which you could program by defining end values (and sometimes start values), and use to generate RAM addresses and CRT sync signals. There was also a separate row address, so the original intention clearly was for character based displays: With a bit of additional components, you'd read some RAM content describing a character into a latch, and then you'd use this to index a ROM describing the pixel pattern for that character. Which you'd load into a shift register and shift out to the video DAC.
But of course then people also thought of ways to use this to display bit graphics. E.g. with a "character height" of 1, and no ROM access, and piping to RAM contents directly out of the shift registers. Or other variants for color.
And you could have configuration bits that control which variant of external components to use (with ROM lookup, without ROM lookup, with color table lookup).
And so, and so on. Bit the differences was all in the additional components, so "the 6845 worked bitwise" etc. doesn't really make sense.
The chip was quite successful, and used in many different ways, and the registers used ended up in the CGA, EGA, VGA etc. cards (with various extensions), and today's graphics card still have a legacy mode with this register layout. But the 6845 by itself still only is a bunch of counters.
In the 6845 data sheet, there's an example for additional components to create a character-based display, and you can read up on the details of operation.
answered May 13 at 13:41
dirktdirkt
9,65512647
edited May 13 at 14:00
answered May 13 at 13:41
dirktdirkt
9,65512647
answered May 13 at 13:41
dirktdirkt
9,65512647
answered May 13 at 13:41
dirktdirkt
9,65512647
9,65512647
Most excellent. So was memory bandwidth a problem if you did things bitwise? Or did it include some sort of "stuffing" system?
– Maury Markowitz
May 13 at 13:54
1
The "stuffing" system was the shift register I mentioned - RAM wasn't fast enough at that time to read memory every pixel (say, for 80x25 characters with 8x9 pixels per character), so e.g. you'd read 8 pixels at once, and then shift them out. Same for bit graphics.
– dirkt
May 13 at 13:57
The 6845 was limited to 127 rows per screen, so a character height of 1 wouldn't work. Instead, 6845-based bitmap displays would use the 6845's row output to select among several partial bitmaps of 127 or fewer lines each, which would then be displayed interleaved.
– supercat
May 13 at 21:20
On some machines that use the 6845 - certainly the Amstrad CPC and the Acorn BBC Micro - it's possible to get past the 127 line limit by changing register values mid-frame. I'm not sure how feasible that would be on a PC with a CGA card though.
– Matthew Barber
May 14 at 6:36
@supercat: I vaguely remember that some bitmap graphic modes worked by setting character height to 1; not sure about the context (it may have been a modified 6845 design that has become part of an integrated graphics card, with the total line counter width increased). Anyhow, the alternative is to set it to a power of two, and use the row address pins to address the RAM.
– dirkt
May 14 at 6:40
|
show 2 more comments
Most excellent. So was memory bandwidth a problem if you did things bitwise? Or did it include some sort of "stuffing" system?
– Maury Markowitz
May 13 at 13:54
1
The "stuffing" system was the shift register I mentioned - RAM wasn't fast enough at that time to read memory every pixel (say, for 80x25 characters with 8x9 pixels per character), so e.g. you'd read 8 pixels at once, and then shift them out. Same for bit graphics.
– dirkt
May 13 at 13:57
The 6845 was limited to 127 rows per screen, so a character height of 1 wouldn't work. Instead, 6845-based bitmap displays would use the 6845's row output to select among several partial bitmaps of 127 or fewer lines each, which would then be displayed interleaved.
– supercat
May 13 at 21:20
On some machines that use the 6845 - certainly the Amstrad CPC and the Acorn BBC Micro - it's possible to get past the 127 line limit by changing register values mid-frame. I'm not sure how feasible that would be on a PC with a CGA card though.
– Matthew Barber
May 14 at 6:36
@supercat: I vaguely remember that some bitmap graphic modes worked by setting character height to 1; not sure about the context (it may have been a modified 6845 design that has become part of an integrated graphics card, with the total line counter width increased). Anyhow, the alternative is to set it to a power of two, and use the row address pins to address the RAM.
– dirkt
May 14 at 6:40
Most excellent. So was memory bandwidth a problem if you did things bitwise? Or did it include some sort of "stuffing" system?
– Maury Markowitz
May 13 at 13:54
Most excellent. So was memory bandwidth a problem if you did things bitwise? Or did it include some sort of "stuffing" system?
– Maury Markowitz
May 13 at 13:54
1
1
The "stuffing" system was the shift register I mentioned - RAM wasn't fast enough at that time to read memory every pixel (say, for 80x25 characters with 8x9 pixels per character), so e.g. you'd read 8 pixels at once, and then shift them out. Same for bit graphics.
– dirkt
May 13 at 13:57
The "stuffing" system was the shift register I mentioned - RAM wasn't fast enough at that time to read memory every pixel (say, for 80x25 characters with 8x9 pixels per character), so e.g. you'd read 8 pixels at once, and then shift them out. Same for bit graphics.
– dirkt
May 13 at 13:57
The 6845 was limited to 127 rows per screen, so a character height of 1 wouldn't work. Instead, 6845-based bitmap displays would use the 6845's row output to select among several partial bitmaps of 127 or fewer lines each, which would then be displayed interleaved.
– supercat
May 13 at 21:20
The 6845 was limited to 127 rows per screen, so a character height of 1 wouldn't work. Instead, 6845-based bitmap displays would use the 6845's row output to select among several partial bitmaps of 127 or fewer lines each, which would then be displayed interleaved.
– supercat
May 13 at 21:20
On some machines that use the 6845 - certainly the Amstrad CPC and the Acorn BBC Micro - it's possible to get past the 127 line limit by changing register values mid-frame. I'm not sure how feasible that would be on a PC with a CGA card though.
– Matthew Barber
May 14 at 6:36
On some machines that use the 6845 - certainly the Amstrad CPC and the Acorn BBC Micro - it's possible to get past the 127 line limit by changing register values mid-frame. I'm not sure how feasible that would be on a PC with a CGA card though.
– Matthew Barber
May 14 at 6:36
@supercat: I vaguely remember that some bitmap graphic modes worked by setting character height to 1; not sure about the context (it may have been a modified 6845 design that has become part of an integrated graphics card, with the total line counter width increased). Anyhow, the alternative is to set it to a power of two, and use the row address pins to address the RAM.
– dirkt
May 14 at 6:40
@supercat: I vaguely remember that some bitmap graphic modes worked by setting character height to 1; not sure about the context (it may have been a modified 6845 design that has become part of an integrated graphics card, with the total line counter width increased). Anyhow, the alternative is to set it to a power of two, and use the row address pins to address the RAM.
– dirkt
May 14 at 6:40
|
show 2 more comments
CGA and Hercules Graphics use the 6845. In graphics mode, each pixel is controlled individually, with no involvement from the character generator.
Graphics mode is controlled by bit 1 of the 03D8h control register; when it’s set, the framebuffer is treated as containing bitmap information, and when it’s cleared, the framebuffer is processed by the character generator. The bitmap layout in CGA isn’t linear; even rows come first, followed by odd rows (offset by 8 KiB). Pixels are packed, four pixels per byte in low resolution, eight pixels per byte in high resolution. Hercules has a similar interleaved layout, with four banks instead of two.
This page has lots of details on CGA.
answered May 13 at 13:40
Stephen KittStephen Kitt
43.8k8183188
add a comment |
CGA and Hercules Graphics use the 6845. In graphics mode, each pixel is controlled individually, with no involvement from the character generator.
Graphics mode is controlled by bit 1 of the 03D8h control register; when it’s set, the framebuffer is treated as containing bitmap information, and when it’s cleared, the framebuffer is processed by the character generator. The bitmap layout in CGA isn’t linear; even rows come first, followed by odd rows (offset by 8 KiB). Pixels are packed, four pixels per byte in low resolution, eight pixels per byte in high resolution. Hercules has a similar interleaved layout, with four banks instead of two.
This page has lots of details on CGA.
answered May 13 at 13:40
Stephen KittStephen Kitt
43.8k8183188
add a comment |
CGA and Hercules Graphics use the 6845. In graphics mode, each pixel is controlled individually, with no involvement from the character generator.
Graphics mode is controlled by bit 1 of the 03D8h control register; when it’s set, the framebuffer is treated as containing bitmap information, and when it’s cleared, the framebuffer is processed by the character generator. The bitmap layout in CGA isn’t linear; even rows come first, followed by odd rows (offset by 8 KiB). Pixels are packed, four pixels per byte in low resolution, eight pixels per byte in high resolution. Hercules has a similar interleaved layout, with four banks instead of two.
This page has lots of details on CGA.
answered May 13 at 13:40
Stephen KittStephen Kitt
43.8k8183188
CGA and Hercules Graphics use the 6845. In graphics mode, each pixel is controlled individually, with no involvement from the character generator.
Graphics mode is controlled by bit 1 of the 03D8h control register; when it’s set, the framebuffer is treated as containing bitmap information, and when it’s cleared, the framebuffer is processed by the character generator. The bitmap layout in CGA isn’t linear; even rows come first, followed by odd rows (offset by 8 KiB). Pixels are packed, four pixels per byte in low resolution, eight pixels per byte in high resolution. Hercules has a similar interleaved layout, with four banks instead of two.
This page has lots of details on CGA.
answered May 13 at 13:40
Stephen KittStephen Kitt
43.8k8183188
answered May 13 at 13:40
Stephen KittStephen Kitt
43.8k8183188
answered May 13 at 13:40
Stephen KittStephen Kitt
43.8k8183188
answered May 13 at 13:40
Stephen KittStephen Kitt
43.8k8183188
43.8k8183188
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Retrocomputing Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f10996%2fmotorola-6845-and-bitwise-graphics%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
