On 2026May 20,, at 8:16 PM, Curious Marc <[email protected]> wrote: > > Here is the same module dated as 1967. If you trust Alamy… Could it be from a > 494 or would the 30 bit width make no sense? > Marc
You forgot the link, but I know the picture you allude to, I did encounter it earlier and assessed it. https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-module-of-32-kilobyte-16-bit-univac-core-memory-from-1967-32733901.html <https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-module-of-32-kilobyte-16-bit-univac-core-memory-from-1967-32733901.html> 494 documents say the mem increment size was 16KWords using 8KWord sub-modules, and says there were half-word parity bits. The descriptive line in the alamy photo says 32K*16 bits. The 16 bits would make sense for the half-word parity in the 494. It’s conceivable they used the same physical module design in the two machines (1108/494) with fewer bits populated in modules for the 494 (the other frame of the module is not visible in the alamy photo). But the large size of 32K is still very disparate from the 494 docs, and it’s still difficult to square with the 19/20 bits of the module here. I am a little skeptical of the attribution in the alamy photo. >> On May 15, 2026, at 2:16 PM, Brent Hilpert via cctalk >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I was asked to examine a large core module, it has a UNIVAC label and part >> no, manufactured in 1971 but probably a little older in design. No >> providence known. >> >> I suspect it is from an 1108 or perhaps an 1106, based on the reasoning >> presented in the web link below. I’m a little curious for a firmer >> confirmation though. 1108/6 documentation on bitsavers has been very >> useful, but what’s there doesn’t go deep enough into the hardware to provide >> a hard confirmation. Is there even an 1108 or 6 still in existence? >> >> The module, and what I’ve figured out: >> http://madrona.ca/e/coreUnivac/index.html >> <http://madrona.ca/e/coreUnivac/index.html>
