Jump to content
We owe you an explanation.
July 6: An important update for readers in Japan.

You deserve an explanation, so please don't skip this 1-minute read. It's Monday, July 6. Our fundraiser won't last long, but fewer people are seeing our message this month and we might not hit our goal. If you've lost count of how many times you've visited Wikipedia this year, we hope that means it's given you at least ¥300 of knowledge. If everyone who finds Wikipedia useful gave ¥300, we'd hit our goal in a few hours.

It's been 25 years and Wikipedia is still free. It's still created by people, not machines, and we don't run ads or put up paywalls because we're not here to make a profit off your attention. In other words, it's still the internet we were promised.

Less than 2% of our readers donate, so if you've never given and Wikipedia has provided you with at least ¥300 worth of knowledge, donate today. If you are undecided, remember any contribution helps.

Proud host of Wikipedia and other free knowledge projects
How often would you like to donate?
Support Wikipedia year-round
Thanks for your generous support
Please select an amount (JPY)
The average donation in Japan is around ¥800.
  • Preferred Amount
Please select a payment method
Please select an amount (minimum ¥154)
We cannot accept donations greater than 3850000 JPY through our website. Please contact our major gifts staff at benefactors@wikimedia.org.
Please select a payment method
Can we follow up and let you know if we need your help again? The support and advice we get from donors in Japan is priceless, but many donors don't let us stay in touch. Will you commit today, this Monday, to staying in touch with the Wikimedia Foundation?
Sorry to hear that. We don't email often; would you consider changing your mind?
Thanks for changing your mind! We’ll respect your inbox.
Your information is handled in accordance with our donor privacy policy, and each email you receive will include easy unsubscribe options.
Please select an email option
Almost done: Please, make it  monthly.
Monthly support is the best way to ensure that Wikipedia keeps thriving.
How would you like to be reminded?
Whether you give now or later, any contribution helps. We can send you an email or text message reminder to join the 2% of readers who donate.
🎉 Thank you for donating recently! 🎉
Your support means the world to us. We'll hide banners in this browser for the rest of our campaign.
Where your donation goes
Accountability and transparency are core values at the Wikimedia Foundation. We manage funds and resources to ensure that every contribution supports our mission. We have earned the Platinum Seal of Transparency from Candid (formerly GuideStar), and Charity Navigator awarded us its highest rating. You can read our most recent annual report for more information about our financial health.
45% $85.4M Technology 32% $60.7M Support 12% $22.8M Fundraising 11% $20.9M General $189.7M Total Funding
45% Investment in Technology

Nearly half of our budget goes toward supporting the technology that powers Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. We are constantly working to enhance the user experience for both contributors and readers, improve site security, and ensure reliable access to our websites globally. This infrastructure and product support sustain one of the top ten most visited websites in the world, all at a fraction of the cost of popular for-profit websites.

32% Support for Volunteers

The global reach of Wikimedia projects is made possible by the hard work of volunteers from across the globe. We provide grants, legal support, and other resources to help build vibrant volunteer communities. Additionally, we promote community engagement through outreach initiatives and advocate for the growth and protection of free knowledge.

12% Allocation to Fundraising Efforts

Donor support is crucial to sustaining Wikipedia and our other free knowledge endeavors. Our team is committed to efficient and effective fundraising throughout the year, ensuring that every contribution helps advance our mission.

11% General and Administrative Expenses

Operational costs are essential for the smooth management and governance of the Wikimedia Foundation. These expenses help us recruit top talent and support staff around the world, empowering them to carry out the mission of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Apollo PRISM

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

PRISM (Parallel Reduced Instruction Set Multiprocessor) was Apollo Computer's high-performance CPU used in their DN10000 series workstations. It was for some time the fastest microprocessor available, a high fraction of a Cray-1 in a workstation. Hewlett-Packard purchased Apollo in 1989, ending development of PRISM, although some of PRISM's ideas were later used in HP's own HP-PA Reduced instruction set computer (RISC) and Itanium processors.

PRISM was based on what would be known today as a VLIW-design, while most efforts of the era, 1988, were based on a more "pure" RISC approach. In early RISC designs, the core processor was simplified as much as possible in order to allow more of the chip's real-estate to be used for registers and simplifying the addition of instruction pipelines for improved performance.

Compilers

[edit]

The compilers used with the systems were expected to dedicate more time during compilation to making effective use of the registers and cleaning the instruction stream. By doing instruction scheduling in the compiler, this design avoided the problems and complexity of dynamic instruction scheduling (where instructions for multiple functional units must be selected carefully in order to avoid interdependencies between intermediate values) encountered in superscalar designs such as Digital Equipment Corporation's Alpha.

In some respects, the VLIW design can be thought of as "super-RISCy", as it offloads the instruction selection process to the compiler as well. In the VLIW design, the compiler examines the code and selects instructions that are known to be "safe", and then packages them into longer instruction words. For instance, for a CPU with two functional units, like the PRISM, the compiler would find pairs of safe instructions and stuff them into a single larger word. Inside the CPU, the instructions are simply split apart again, and fed into the selected units.

This design minimizes logical changes to the CPU as functional units are added, as the compiler is handling the instruction selection. However, this also ties the compiled code very tightly to the processor design; for instance, if a new generation of the CPU adds additional functional units, all programs running on it must be re-compiled so the compiler can re-arrange the instructions again, perhaps four-wide instead of two-wide. In comparison, a more traditional design like the PowerPC (PPC) has seen dramatic internal changes, yet code written for the first PPC's will still run without modification on the latest versions. The cost for this is an increasing amount of chip space that has to be dedicated to instruction scheduling.

The Apollo compilers were the first commercial compilers to use single static assignment techniques.

Architectural features

[edit]

PRISM was a "pure" 32-bit design, including thirty-two 32-bit integer and thirty-two 64-bit floating point registers (overlaid by sixty-four 32-bit registers). PRISM could dispatch a single integer or one integer and one floating point instruction per clock cycle, reminiscent of the Intel i860.[1]:97 The floating-point instruction could, in turn, combine a floating-point add and multiply in a single instruction. The compiler attempted to always pair (or triple) instructions up to maintain full use of the internal units, but if it failed to find a safe pair it simply fed in a single integer instruction. PRISM was one of the first designs to include a multiply with add/subtract/truncate in a single (five operand) instruction, so it was often described as a three-issue CPU.

History

[edit]

The original PRISM design exercise was initiated in 1986, announced in March 1988,[2] with its one-to-four-CPU Apollo DN10000 workstation and eventually delivered to customers in October 1988.[3] The "DN" in the name refers to "Domain Node", Domain/OS being the Unix-like operating system used on all of Apollo's machines. Note that PRISM was a multi-chip CPU board, not a single microprocessor, this being fairly common for high-end CPUs at the time.[4] Various chips featured in the DN10000 were also used in other systems, fabricated by Bipolar Integrated Technology.[5]

Approximately one thousand DN10000 systems were sold.

PRISM II, running at twice the clock speed, was delayed by problems in fabing, and then eventually cancelled after the HP purchase. Nevertheless, HP indicated that several features of the PRISM design were to be introduced into later generations of their Precision Architecture, with multiprocessing support being of particular interest.[6] At the time, HP did not have a multiprocessing implementation based on the Precision Architecture.[7] The two main proponents of the VLIW concept, Intel and HP, later collaborated on the Itanium.

The PRISM was claimed to be the fastest CPU on the market during its short life-span.[8] Benchmarking indicated that the speed of the DN10000's CPU was comparable to that of the MIPS M/2000-6, a 20 MHz R3000,[9] but the DN10000 as a system had around twice the performance of the MIPS M/2000-6.[10] The PRISM CPU itself was described as having more than half the performance of "the largest IBM mainframe CPU" for some users, raising the possibility of using a four-processor DN10000 workstation in place of mainframe-based computing facilities.[11] In comparison with common RISC designs of the era, the PRISM was effectively two CPUs in one, making it roughly double the performance of a RISC CPU running at the same clock speed.[citation needed]

Contemporary competitors

[edit]

Although the Intel i860 also used a VLIW (or properly LIW in both cases, as two is not "very" long), extracting performance from the i860 proved notoriously difficult, and in practice the PRISM was much faster.

Digital Equipment Corporation also engineered a RISC chip named PRISM during the same era, but that project was canceled in 1988, and never entered production.

References

[edit]
  1. Andrews, Warren (1 May 1989). "Distinctions blur between DSP solutions". Computer Design. pp. 86–89, 92–94, 96–99. Retrieved 6 July 2025.
  2. "Apollo Computer Launches its 64-Bit PRISM RISC Machine". Unigram/X. 12 March 1988. p. 2. Retrieved 6 July 2025.
  3. "Apollo Ships First PRISM Superworkstations". Unigram/X. 8 October 1988. p. 2. Retrieved 6 July 2025.
  4. "Apollo Comes Out Fighting with PRISM". Unigram/X. 12 March 1988. p. 2. Retrieved 6 July 2025.
  5. "Bipolar Adds FPS to Customer List – but Lags Behind with ECL SPARC". Unigram/X. 12 November 1988. p. 4. Retrieved 6 July 2025.
  6. "Hewlett Weighs Licensing PA RISC to Hitachi, VLSI". Unigram/X. 24 July 1989. p. 4. Retrieved 6 July 2025.
  7. Carl, Mike (July 1989). "The Workstation War Heats Up". HP Professional. pp. 50–53. Retrieved 6 July 2025.
  8. Bayko, John (May 2003). "Section 5, Part II: Apollo PRISM - Superworkstation". Great Microprocessors of the Past and Present. Retrieved 8 March 2023.
  9. M/2000 RISComputer. MIPS Computer Systems. p. 10. Retrieved 8 March 2023.
  10. "Benchmarks: speed versus cost". IEEE Micro. April 1989. p. 83. Retrieved 8 March 2023.
  11. Hemmer, Frédéric; Jagel, Erik; Robertson, Les; Segal, Ben (22 January 1992). Mainframe Services using RISC-based Workstations: the first two years' experience at CERN (Technical report). CERN. p. 2. Retrieved 18 June 2025.