Why was the Sega Genesis marketed as a 16-bit console?If the Sega Genesis/MegaDrive could be overclocked so easily, why couldn't the SNES?

Chemmacros scheme translation

The eyes have it

What should the arbiter and what should have I done in this case?

Why only the fundamental frequency component is said to give useful power?

Implement Homestuck's Catenative Doomsday Dice Cascader

Using a found spellbook as a Sorcerer-Wizard multiclass

Hottest Possible Hydrogen-Fusing Stars

Smooth switching between 12 V batteries, with a toggle switch

Passing multiple files through stdin (over ssh)

What's the name of this light airplane?

Preventing Employees from either switching to Competitors or Opening Their Own Business

Find duplicated column value in CSV

Find the Factorial From the Given Prime Relationship

What's up with this leaf?

How do I write "Show, Don't Tell" as a person with Asperger Syndrome?

Interview not reimboursed if offer is made but not accepted

BGP multihome issue

What is the actual quality of machine translations?

Can an Aarakocra use a shield while flying?

Why would future John risk sending back a T-800 to save his younger self?

How to chain Python function calls so the behaviour is as follows

Is open-sourcing the code of a webapp not recommended?

What does the term "railed" mean in signal processing?

Trapping Rain Water



Why was the Sega Genesis marketed as a 16-bit console?


If the Sega Genesis/MegaDrive could be overclocked so easily, why couldn't the SNES?













3















The Sega Genesis / Mega Drive's main CPU, the Motorola 68000, was a 32-bit processor. Couldn't Sega have marketed the console as a 32-bit device? Or is there a technical distinction about how the 68000 was used in the Genesis that makes the system, as a whole, 16-bit?



My best guesses are that it has something to do with word size (the 68000 can address bytes, 16-bit words, or 32-bit long words) or the size of the buses inside the console. Still, I would think that Sega's marketing team would've chosen the most beneficial number when looking at the technical specs.










share|improve this question









New contributor



Joe Sewell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.























    3















    The Sega Genesis / Mega Drive's main CPU, the Motorola 68000, was a 32-bit processor. Couldn't Sega have marketed the console as a 32-bit device? Or is there a technical distinction about how the 68000 was used in the Genesis that makes the system, as a whole, 16-bit?



    My best guesses are that it has something to do with word size (the 68000 can address bytes, 16-bit words, or 32-bit long words) or the size of the buses inside the console. Still, I would think that Sega's marketing team would've chosen the most beneficial number when looking at the technical specs.










    share|improve this question









    New contributor



    Joe Sewell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.





















      3












      3








      3








      The Sega Genesis / Mega Drive's main CPU, the Motorola 68000, was a 32-bit processor. Couldn't Sega have marketed the console as a 32-bit device? Or is there a technical distinction about how the 68000 was used in the Genesis that makes the system, as a whole, 16-bit?



      My best guesses are that it has something to do with word size (the 68000 can address bytes, 16-bit words, or 32-bit long words) or the size of the buses inside the console. Still, I would think that Sega's marketing team would've chosen the most beneficial number when looking at the technical specs.










      share|improve this question









      New contributor



      Joe Sewell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      The Sega Genesis / Mega Drive's main CPU, the Motorola 68000, was a 32-bit processor. Couldn't Sega have marketed the console as a 32-bit device? Or is there a technical distinction about how the 68000 was used in the Genesis that makes the system, as a whole, 16-bit?



      My best guesses are that it has something to do with word size (the 68000 can address bytes, 16-bit words, or 32-bit long words) or the size of the buses inside the console. Still, I would think that Sega's marketing team would've chosen the most beneficial number when looking at the technical specs.







      sega-genesis terminology






      share|improve this question









      New contributor



      Joe Sewell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.










      share|improve this question









      New contributor



      Joe Sewell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.








      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 8 hours ago







      Joe Sewell













      New contributor



      Joe Sewell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.








      asked 8 hours ago









      Joe SewellJoe Sewell

      1164




      1164




      New contributor



      Joe Sewell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




      New contributor




      Joe Sewell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          5















          ... the Motorola 68000, was a 32-bit processor.




          As already written, Motorola itself said that it is a 16-bit processor.



          And as far as I know, the reason is not the external 16-bit bus but the inner architecture of the 68000:



          The 68000 only had a 16-bit ALU, which means that it could only perform 16-bit operations.



          The CPU executed 32-bit instructions (like add.l) by performing two 16-bit operations internally.



          This 16-bit ALU is a major difference to CPUs like the 386SX that also only had an external 16-bit data bus but a real 32-bit ALU - and therefore were called 32-bit processors by the manufacturers.






          share|improve this answer


















          • 2





            Yes, I’ve always thought of bit-ness as determined by the ALU width (at least, that matches PC descriptions, with the 16-bit IBM PC and its 8088, 32-bit 386SXs, and the 32-bit Pentium with its 64-bit data bus). 32-bit on the 386SX was also associated with 32-bit protected mode, which the CPU was fully capable of handling.

            – Stephen Kitt
            4 hours ago



















          5














          It's usually the width of the system data bus that determines the "bitted-ness" used to describe the system.



          While the Motorola 68k CPU used as a component in the Sega system certainly has some internal 32-bit capabilities, most notably the width of the register page, and is designed for upward compatibility with full 32-bit CPUs (like the 68020), the reality is that the 68000 only possesses a 16-bit data bus. Likewise, the Genesis system data bus is also 16 bits.



          Also, at the time of the introduction of the Genesis, it was very competitive with the technology in other game consoles. So, there was no need for Sega to try to bend the truth with some over-zealous marketing scheme attempting to brand their new console as 32-bit capable. Instead, and only later, did they get into a bit of technical hyperbole with their marketing of "Blast Processing" aimed at the SNES.






          share|improve this answer
































            2















            the Motorola 68000, was a 32-bit processor.




            I'd say 16 Bit - likewise Motorola did (*1).



            The bitness of a processor is and always will be up for discussion, as various features may not operate at the same size. An 8088 can be (an has been) called an 8-bit CPU as well as 16-bit. Similar the 68000 with its 32-bit registers but 16-bit bus. Beside data bus and register size, the ALU can as well be used (*2). Last but not least operand size may be a valid criteria (*3).




            Couldn't Sega have marketed the console as a 32-bit device?




            Yes, the could - but there would have been no gain. At the time the Genesis was introduced (1988) there was no race for 'more bits' especially not in the general public. The prior generation wasn't marketed as 8-bit systems. That's a label that got only retroactive assigned when 16 Bit systems became popular and marketed as such.



            It was about setting a undoubtedly new mark, making everything else look outdated. The second half of the 1980s was also the time when bitness was used to distinguish the 'new' and 'better' computers with the very same label. Atari ST, Commodore Amiga, as well as 286 PCs, where marketed as 16 Bit machines, so the label was already promoted and present in non-geek-minds (*4) as a sign for being the better choice. Hooking up to an established label is almost always better than trying to build a brand from scratch with all new attributes.



            Bottom line: Calling it 16-bit (which it undeniable is) was the best bet for Sega marketing.




            Sidnote: Atari's attempt to sell the Jaguar in 1994 as 64-bit console might as well have worked less than expected for the same reason: Consumers just got used to consoled being called 16-bit and having 32-bit coming up. Jumping too far ahead doesn't work well.




            *1 - The same way next to all manufacturers of 68000 machines did call their products 16-bit computers - or 16/32 as most.



            *2 - Making the Z80 a 4-bit CPU :))



            *3 - Thus the (16-bBit) Z8000 could be rightfully called a 64-bit CPU :))



            *4 - Like always, dad has to pay for a new console and he needs as well a reason to crank out more paper slices than for some other game console - having Sonic didn't ring a bell.






            share|improve this answer

























              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
              );



              );






              Joe Sewell is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function ()
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f11210%2fwhy-was-the-sega-genesis-marketed-as-a-16-bit-console%23new-answer', 'question_page');

              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes








              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              5















              ... the Motorola 68000, was a 32-bit processor.




              As already written, Motorola itself said that it is a 16-bit processor.



              And as far as I know, the reason is not the external 16-bit bus but the inner architecture of the 68000:



              The 68000 only had a 16-bit ALU, which means that it could only perform 16-bit operations.



              The CPU executed 32-bit instructions (like add.l) by performing two 16-bit operations internally.



              This 16-bit ALU is a major difference to CPUs like the 386SX that also only had an external 16-bit data bus but a real 32-bit ALU - and therefore were called 32-bit processors by the manufacturers.






              share|improve this answer


















              • 2





                Yes, I’ve always thought of bit-ness as determined by the ALU width (at least, that matches PC descriptions, with the 16-bit IBM PC and its 8088, 32-bit 386SXs, and the 32-bit Pentium with its 64-bit data bus). 32-bit on the 386SX was also associated with 32-bit protected mode, which the CPU was fully capable of handling.

                – Stephen Kitt
                4 hours ago
















              5















              ... the Motorola 68000, was a 32-bit processor.




              As already written, Motorola itself said that it is a 16-bit processor.



              And as far as I know, the reason is not the external 16-bit bus but the inner architecture of the 68000:



              The 68000 only had a 16-bit ALU, which means that it could only perform 16-bit operations.



              The CPU executed 32-bit instructions (like add.l) by performing two 16-bit operations internally.



              This 16-bit ALU is a major difference to CPUs like the 386SX that also only had an external 16-bit data bus but a real 32-bit ALU - and therefore were called 32-bit processors by the manufacturers.






              share|improve this answer


















              • 2





                Yes, I’ve always thought of bit-ness as determined by the ALU width (at least, that matches PC descriptions, with the 16-bit IBM PC and its 8088, 32-bit 386SXs, and the 32-bit Pentium with its 64-bit data bus). 32-bit on the 386SX was also associated with 32-bit protected mode, which the CPU was fully capable of handling.

                – Stephen Kitt
                4 hours ago














              5












              5








              5








              ... the Motorola 68000, was a 32-bit processor.




              As already written, Motorola itself said that it is a 16-bit processor.



              And as far as I know, the reason is not the external 16-bit bus but the inner architecture of the 68000:



              The 68000 only had a 16-bit ALU, which means that it could only perform 16-bit operations.



              The CPU executed 32-bit instructions (like add.l) by performing two 16-bit operations internally.



              This 16-bit ALU is a major difference to CPUs like the 386SX that also only had an external 16-bit data bus but a real 32-bit ALU - and therefore were called 32-bit processors by the manufacturers.






              share|improve this answer














              ... the Motorola 68000, was a 32-bit processor.




              As already written, Motorola itself said that it is a 16-bit processor.



              And as far as I know, the reason is not the external 16-bit bus but the inner architecture of the 68000:



              The 68000 only had a 16-bit ALU, which means that it could only perform 16-bit operations.



              The CPU executed 32-bit instructions (like add.l) by performing two 16-bit operations internally.



              This 16-bit ALU is a major difference to CPUs like the 386SX that also only had an external 16-bit data bus but a real 32-bit ALU - and therefore were called 32-bit processors by the manufacturers.







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered 7 hours ago









              Martin RosenauMartin Rosenau

              945137




              945137







              • 2





                Yes, I’ve always thought of bit-ness as determined by the ALU width (at least, that matches PC descriptions, with the 16-bit IBM PC and its 8088, 32-bit 386SXs, and the 32-bit Pentium with its 64-bit data bus). 32-bit on the 386SX was also associated with 32-bit protected mode, which the CPU was fully capable of handling.

                – Stephen Kitt
                4 hours ago













              • 2





                Yes, I’ve always thought of bit-ness as determined by the ALU width (at least, that matches PC descriptions, with the 16-bit IBM PC and its 8088, 32-bit 386SXs, and the 32-bit Pentium with its 64-bit data bus). 32-bit on the 386SX was also associated with 32-bit protected mode, which the CPU was fully capable of handling.

                – Stephen Kitt
                4 hours ago








              2




              2





              Yes, I’ve always thought of bit-ness as determined by the ALU width (at least, that matches PC descriptions, with the 16-bit IBM PC and its 8088, 32-bit 386SXs, and the 32-bit Pentium with its 64-bit data bus). 32-bit on the 386SX was also associated with 32-bit protected mode, which the CPU was fully capable of handling.

              – Stephen Kitt
              4 hours ago






              Yes, I’ve always thought of bit-ness as determined by the ALU width (at least, that matches PC descriptions, with the 16-bit IBM PC and its 8088, 32-bit 386SXs, and the 32-bit Pentium with its 64-bit data bus). 32-bit on the 386SX was also associated with 32-bit protected mode, which the CPU was fully capable of handling.

              – Stephen Kitt
              4 hours ago












              5














              It's usually the width of the system data bus that determines the "bitted-ness" used to describe the system.



              While the Motorola 68k CPU used as a component in the Sega system certainly has some internal 32-bit capabilities, most notably the width of the register page, and is designed for upward compatibility with full 32-bit CPUs (like the 68020), the reality is that the 68000 only possesses a 16-bit data bus. Likewise, the Genesis system data bus is also 16 bits.



              Also, at the time of the introduction of the Genesis, it was very competitive with the technology in other game consoles. So, there was no need for Sega to try to bend the truth with some over-zealous marketing scheme attempting to brand their new console as 32-bit capable. Instead, and only later, did they get into a bit of technical hyperbole with their marketing of "Blast Processing" aimed at the SNES.






              share|improve this answer





























                5














                It's usually the width of the system data bus that determines the "bitted-ness" used to describe the system.



                While the Motorola 68k CPU used as a component in the Sega system certainly has some internal 32-bit capabilities, most notably the width of the register page, and is designed for upward compatibility with full 32-bit CPUs (like the 68020), the reality is that the 68000 only possesses a 16-bit data bus. Likewise, the Genesis system data bus is also 16 bits.



                Also, at the time of the introduction of the Genesis, it was very competitive with the technology in other game consoles. So, there was no need for Sega to try to bend the truth with some over-zealous marketing scheme attempting to brand their new console as 32-bit capable. Instead, and only later, did they get into a bit of technical hyperbole with their marketing of "Blast Processing" aimed at the SNES.






                share|improve this answer



























                  5












                  5








                  5







                  It's usually the width of the system data bus that determines the "bitted-ness" used to describe the system.



                  While the Motorola 68k CPU used as a component in the Sega system certainly has some internal 32-bit capabilities, most notably the width of the register page, and is designed for upward compatibility with full 32-bit CPUs (like the 68020), the reality is that the 68000 only possesses a 16-bit data bus. Likewise, the Genesis system data bus is also 16 bits.



                  Also, at the time of the introduction of the Genesis, it was very competitive with the technology in other game consoles. So, there was no need for Sega to try to bend the truth with some over-zealous marketing scheme attempting to brand their new console as 32-bit capable. Instead, and only later, did they get into a bit of technical hyperbole with their marketing of "Blast Processing" aimed at the SNES.






                  share|improve this answer















                  It's usually the width of the system data bus that determines the "bitted-ness" used to describe the system.



                  While the Motorola 68k CPU used as a component in the Sega system certainly has some internal 32-bit capabilities, most notably the width of the register page, and is designed for upward compatibility with full 32-bit CPUs (like the 68020), the reality is that the 68000 only possesses a 16-bit data bus. Likewise, the Genesis system data bus is also 16 bits.



                  Also, at the time of the introduction of the Genesis, it was very competitive with the technology in other game consoles. So, there was no need for Sega to try to bend the truth with some over-zealous marketing scheme attempting to brand their new console as 32-bit capable. Instead, and only later, did they get into a bit of technical hyperbole with their marketing of "Blast Processing" aimed at the SNES.







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited 4 hours ago

























                  answered 8 hours ago









                  Brian HBrian H

                  19.5k71171




                  19.5k71171





















                      2















                      the Motorola 68000, was a 32-bit processor.




                      I'd say 16 Bit - likewise Motorola did (*1).



                      The bitness of a processor is and always will be up for discussion, as various features may not operate at the same size. An 8088 can be (an has been) called an 8-bit CPU as well as 16-bit. Similar the 68000 with its 32-bit registers but 16-bit bus. Beside data bus and register size, the ALU can as well be used (*2). Last but not least operand size may be a valid criteria (*3).




                      Couldn't Sega have marketed the console as a 32-bit device?




                      Yes, the could - but there would have been no gain. At the time the Genesis was introduced (1988) there was no race for 'more bits' especially not in the general public. The prior generation wasn't marketed as 8-bit systems. That's a label that got only retroactive assigned when 16 Bit systems became popular and marketed as such.



                      It was about setting a undoubtedly new mark, making everything else look outdated. The second half of the 1980s was also the time when bitness was used to distinguish the 'new' and 'better' computers with the very same label. Atari ST, Commodore Amiga, as well as 286 PCs, where marketed as 16 Bit machines, so the label was already promoted and present in non-geek-minds (*4) as a sign for being the better choice. Hooking up to an established label is almost always better than trying to build a brand from scratch with all new attributes.



                      Bottom line: Calling it 16-bit (which it undeniable is) was the best bet for Sega marketing.




                      Sidnote: Atari's attempt to sell the Jaguar in 1994 as 64-bit console might as well have worked less than expected for the same reason: Consumers just got used to consoled being called 16-bit and having 32-bit coming up. Jumping too far ahead doesn't work well.




                      *1 - The same way next to all manufacturers of 68000 machines did call their products 16-bit computers - or 16/32 as most.



                      *2 - Making the Z80 a 4-bit CPU :))



                      *3 - Thus the (16-bBit) Z8000 could be rightfully called a 64-bit CPU :))



                      *4 - Like always, dad has to pay for a new console and he needs as well a reason to crank out more paper slices than for some other game console - having Sonic didn't ring a bell.






                      share|improve this answer





























                        2















                        the Motorola 68000, was a 32-bit processor.




                        I'd say 16 Bit - likewise Motorola did (*1).



                        The bitness of a processor is and always will be up for discussion, as various features may not operate at the same size. An 8088 can be (an has been) called an 8-bit CPU as well as 16-bit. Similar the 68000 with its 32-bit registers but 16-bit bus. Beside data bus and register size, the ALU can as well be used (*2). Last but not least operand size may be a valid criteria (*3).




                        Couldn't Sega have marketed the console as a 32-bit device?




                        Yes, the could - but there would have been no gain. At the time the Genesis was introduced (1988) there was no race for 'more bits' especially not in the general public. The prior generation wasn't marketed as 8-bit systems. That's a label that got only retroactive assigned when 16 Bit systems became popular and marketed as such.



                        It was about setting a undoubtedly new mark, making everything else look outdated. The second half of the 1980s was also the time when bitness was used to distinguish the 'new' and 'better' computers with the very same label. Atari ST, Commodore Amiga, as well as 286 PCs, where marketed as 16 Bit machines, so the label was already promoted and present in non-geek-minds (*4) as a sign for being the better choice. Hooking up to an established label is almost always better than trying to build a brand from scratch with all new attributes.



                        Bottom line: Calling it 16-bit (which it undeniable is) was the best bet for Sega marketing.




                        Sidnote: Atari's attempt to sell the Jaguar in 1994 as 64-bit console might as well have worked less than expected for the same reason: Consumers just got used to consoled being called 16-bit and having 32-bit coming up. Jumping too far ahead doesn't work well.




                        *1 - The same way next to all manufacturers of 68000 machines did call their products 16-bit computers - or 16/32 as most.



                        *2 - Making the Z80 a 4-bit CPU :))



                        *3 - Thus the (16-bBit) Z8000 could be rightfully called a 64-bit CPU :))



                        *4 - Like always, dad has to pay for a new console and he needs as well a reason to crank out more paper slices than for some other game console - having Sonic didn't ring a bell.






                        share|improve this answer



























                          2












                          2








                          2








                          the Motorola 68000, was a 32-bit processor.




                          I'd say 16 Bit - likewise Motorola did (*1).



                          The bitness of a processor is and always will be up for discussion, as various features may not operate at the same size. An 8088 can be (an has been) called an 8-bit CPU as well as 16-bit. Similar the 68000 with its 32-bit registers but 16-bit bus. Beside data bus and register size, the ALU can as well be used (*2). Last but not least operand size may be a valid criteria (*3).




                          Couldn't Sega have marketed the console as a 32-bit device?




                          Yes, the could - but there would have been no gain. At the time the Genesis was introduced (1988) there was no race for 'more bits' especially not in the general public. The prior generation wasn't marketed as 8-bit systems. That's a label that got only retroactive assigned when 16 Bit systems became popular and marketed as such.



                          It was about setting a undoubtedly new mark, making everything else look outdated. The second half of the 1980s was also the time when bitness was used to distinguish the 'new' and 'better' computers with the very same label. Atari ST, Commodore Amiga, as well as 286 PCs, where marketed as 16 Bit machines, so the label was already promoted and present in non-geek-minds (*4) as a sign for being the better choice. Hooking up to an established label is almost always better than trying to build a brand from scratch with all new attributes.



                          Bottom line: Calling it 16-bit (which it undeniable is) was the best bet for Sega marketing.




                          Sidnote: Atari's attempt to sell the Jaguar in 1994 as 64-bit console might as well have worked less than expected for the same reason: Consumers just got used to consoled being called 16-bit and having 32-bit coming up. Jumping too far ahead doesn't work well.




                          *1 - The same way next to all manufacturers of 68000 machines did call their products 16-bit computers - or 16/32 as most.



                          *2 - Making the Z80 a 4-bit CPU :))



                          *3 - Thus the (16-bBit) Z8000 could be rightfully called a 64-bit CPU :))



                          *4 - Like always, dad has to pay for a new console and he needs as well a reason to crank out more paper slices than for some other game console - having Sonic didn't ring a bell.






                          share|improve this answer
















                          the Motorola 68000, was a 32-bit processor.




                          I'd say 16 Bit - likewise Motorola did (*1).



                          The bitness of a processor is and always will be up for discussion, as various features may not operate at the same size. An 8088 can be (an has been) called an 8-bit CPU as well as 16-bit. Similar the 68000 with its 32-bit registers but 16-bit bus. Beside data bus and register size, the ALU can as well be used (*2). Last but not least operand size may be a valid criteria (*3).




                          Couldn't Sega have marketed the console as a 32-bit device?




                          Yes, the could - but there would have been no gain. At the time the Genesis was introduced (1988) there was no race for 'more bits' especially not in the general public. The prior generation wasn't marketed as 8-bit systems. That's a label that got only retroactive assigned when 16 Bit systems became popular and marketed as such.



                          It was about setting a undoubtedly new mark, making everything else look outdated. The second half of the 1980s was also the time when bitness was used to distinguish the 'new' and 'better' computers with the very same label. Atari ST, Commodore Amiga, as well as 286 PCs, where marketed as 16 Bit machines, so the label was already promoted and present in non-geek-minds (*4) as a sign for being the better choice. Hooking up to an established label is almost always better than trying to build a brand from scratch with all new attributes.



                          Bottom line: Calling it 16-bit (which it undeniable is) was the best bet for Sega marketing.




                          Sidnote: Atari's attempt to sell the Jaguar in 1994 as 64-bit console might as well have worked less than expected for the same reason: Consumers just got used to consoled being called 16-bit and having 32-bit coming up. Jumping too far ahead doesn't work well.




                          *1 - The same way next to all manufacturers of 68000 machines did call their products 16-bit computers - or 16/32 as most.



                          *2 - Making the Z80 a 4-bit CPU :))



                          *3 - Thus the (16-bBit) Z8000 could be rightfully called a 64-bit CPU :))



                          *4 - Like always, dad has to pay for a new console and he needs as well a reason to crank out more paper slices than for some other game console - having Sonic didn't ring a bell.







                          share|improve this answer














                          share|improve this answer



                          share|improve this answer








                          edited 2 hours ago

























                          answered 7 hours ago









                          RaffzahnRaffzahn

                          59.5k6147246




                          59.5k6147246




















                              Joe Sewell is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









                              draft saved

                              draft discarded


















                              Joe Sewell is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                              Joe Sewell is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











                              Joe Sewell is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














                              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.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function ()
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f11210%2fwhy-was-the-sega-genesis-marketed-as-a-16-bit-console%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                              );

                              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







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

                              Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

                              Tom Holland Mục lục Đầu đời và giáo dục | Sự nghiệp | Cuộc sống cá nhân | Phim tham gia | Giải thưởng và đề cử | Chú thích | Liên kết ngoài | Trình đơn chuyển hướngProfile“Person Details for Thomas Stanley Holland, "England and Wales Birth Registration Index, 1837-2008" — FamilySearch.org”"Meet Tom Holland... the 16-year-old star of The Impossible""Schoolboy actor Tom Holland finds himself in Oscar contention for role in tsunami drama"“Naomi Watts on the Prince William and Harry's reaction to her film about the late Princess Diana”lưu trữ"Holland and Pflueger Are West End's Two New 'Billy Elliots'""I'm so envious of my son, the movie star! British writer Dominic Holland's spent 20 years trying to crack Hollywood - but he's been beaten to it by a very unlikely rival"“Richard and Margaret Povey of Jersey, Channel Islands, UK: Information about Thomas Stanley Holland”"Tom Holland to play Billy Elliot""New Billy Elliot leaving the garage"Billy Elliot the Musical - Tom Holland - Billy"A Tale of four Billys: Tom Holland""The Feel Good Factor""Thames Christian College schoolboys join Myleene Klass for The Feelgood Factor""Government launches £600,000 arts bursaries pilot""BILLY's Chapman, Holland, Gardner & Jackson-Keen Visit Prime Minister""Elton John 'blown away' by Billy Elliot fifth birthday" (video with John's interview and fragments of Holland's performance)"First News interviews Arrietty's Tom Holland"“33rd Critics' Circle Film Awards winners”“National Board of Review Current Awards”Bản gốc"Ron Howard Whaling Tale 'In The Heart Of The Sea' Casts Tom Holland"“'Spider-Man' Finds Tom Holland to Star as New Web-Slinger”lưu trữ“Captain America: Civil War (2016)”“Film Review: ‘Captain America: Civil War’”lưu trữ“‘Captain America: Civil War’ review: Choose your own avenger”lưu trữ“The Lost City of Z reviews”“Sony Pictures and Marvel Studios Find Their 'Spider-Man' Star and Director”“‘Mary Magdalene’, ‘Current War’ & ‘Wind River’ Get 2017 Release Dates From Weinstein”“Lionsgate Unleashing Daisy Ridley & Tom Holland Starrer ‘Chaos Walking’ In Cannes”“PTA's 'Master' Leads Chicago Film Critics Nominations, UPDATED: Houston and Indiana Critics Nominations”“Nominaciones Goya 2013 Telecinco Cinema – ENG”“Jameson Empire Film Awards: Martin Freeman wins best actor for performance in The Hobbit”“34th Annual Young Artist Awards”Bản gốc“Teen Choice Awards 2016—Captain America: Civil War Leads Second Wave of Nominations”“BAFTA Film Award Nominations: ‘La La Land’ Leads Race”“Saturn Awards Nominations 2017: 'Rogue One,' 'Walking Dead' Lead”Tom HollandTom HollandTom HollandTom Hollandmedia.gettyimages.comWorldCat Identities300279794no20130442900000 0004 0355 42791085670554170004732cb16706349t(data)XX5557367