←back to thread

518 points LorenDB | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
trollbridge ◴[] No.46173936[source]
Not to disrespect this, but it used to be entirely normal to have a GUI environment on a machine with 2MB of RAM and a 40MB disk.

Or 128K of ram and 400 kb disk for that matter.

replies(10): >>46173975 #>>46174032 #>>46174138 #>>46174272 #>>46174291 #>>46174522 #>>46174810 #>>46174831 #>>46179105 #>>46179554 #
maccard ◴[] No.46174032[source]
A single 1920x1080 framebuffer (which is a low resolution monitor in 2025 IMO) is 2MB. Add any compositing into the mix for multi window displays and it literally doesn’t fit in memory.
replies(8): >>46174159 #>>46174187 #>>46174618 #>>46174766 #>>46176381 #>>46178650 #>>46179683 #>>46182290 #
echoangle ◴[] No.46174159[source]
Do you really need the framebuffer in RAM? Wouldn't that be entirely in the GPU RAM?
replies(6): >>46174217 #>>46174228 #>>46174232 #>>46174790 #>>46174992 #>>46175002 #
ErroneousBosh ◴[] No.46175002[source]
Computers didn't used to have GPUs back then when 150kB was a significant amount of graphics memory.
replies(1): >>46177337 #
trollbridge ◴[] No.46177337[source]
The IBM PGC (1984) was a discrete GPU with 320kB of RAM and slightly over 64kB of ROM.

The EGA (1984) and VGA (1987) could conceivably be considered a GPU although not turning complete. EGA had 64, 128, 192, or 256K and VGA 256K.

The 8514/A (1987) was Turing complete although it had 512kB. The Image Adapter/A (1989) was far more powerful, pretty much the first modern GPU as we know them and came with 1MB expandable to 3MB.

replies(3): >>46180590 #>>46181872 #>>46191382 #
1. lproven ◴[] No.46191382{3}[source]
> The 8514/A (1987) was Turing complete

WTF? Tell me more!

I have one, but I have no matching screen so I never tried it... Maybe it's worth finding a converter.