(untitled)

I wish to learn low-level computer concepts. I'm curious about how different components, such as CPUs, RAM, and hardware, interact with one another. Should I start with the basics, such as Ohm's law, or is there a better method or resource I can use to do this?

program some very simple pic controllers, for example temperature sensor or whatever really gives you insight but you'll have to read the fuarrrking manual to figure out the register level interface

can you tell us what you already know?

also for programming pic controllers there is a very good ide mplab ide x or something like that for example avr manufacturer offers another ide -- i didn't bother to memorize the name -- and it's fuarrrking crap just thrash honestly, so while avrs themselves seem to be a bit more comfy than pics, for learning purposes pics would be much better imo. also starting with ultra simple ones, like those that have only 56 or so words of RAM is very educating in that you have to keep it super simple while achieving the goal.

You don't really need to know stuff at that level of physics, every architecture course i did started with logic ports (AND, NAND, XOR etc..). It's all logic in the end. Anyway what you are searching for is computer architecture. I can tell you there is a difference between architecture about how the components work. The current arch (amd64) is a complicated soykaffest and a somewhat easier one is the relatively new RISC-V. Then you have to learn assembly codes and registry stuff. Even this differs between architectures. Maybe search what they use at MIT to learn this stuff. but honestly lainon unless you have a very good reason just avoid this. or maybe focus down on what you want to do and learn to do it by practice.

for what purpose do you want to learn those concepts? if you don't have a goal in mind, then it will be very hard to recommend you any materials, or give suggestions at all. >Should I start with the basics, such as Ohm's law why do you think you need to know ohm's law? if your goal is not to learn electronics or hardware design, that's like studying basic chemistry before learning how to cook. but again, since you haven't stated your goals, it's hard, maybe even impossible to help you.

The book you are looking for is Patterson & Hennessy - Computer Organization and Design

There are two possibilities. One is that you are participating in one of the grand posturings typical of imageboard "technologists": the hatred of success. Some persons truly do base their enjoyment of metal as a flaccid counterculture to rival that of people who actually make money, using say, Python, or JavaScript. The other possibility is that you are actually interested, in which case, I would direct you to nand2tetris: https://www.nand2tetris.org/ . This should be all you need, really. Going below the level of logic is a whole different story, but one you may have to do if you want to, say, design your own computer systems or PCBs.

>>74851 >Some persons truly do base their enjoyment of metal as a flaccid counterculture to rival that of people who actually make money, using say, Python, or JavaScript. >flaccid counterculture >flaccid hatred of success is very based. as haskell says -- avoid success at all cost. money and status destroy your identity and turn you into human resembling robot that basically doesn't have any of the humanly traits. the most human humans are the ones who have the wisdom and courage to avoid success at all cost. success is evil. success is a drug devised to trick people into the jaws of the machine that is world. ! don't get fooled into success !

>>74854 Lol. Perhaps there is a reason why success read like suck these.

>>74847 I would rather recommend "David Harris & Sarah Harris: Digital Design and Computer Architecture" for newbies.

>>74885 Harris & Harris? I'll never experience this

It's ironic that people look down on web dev and prefer low level, when in reality the browser has basically become its own complex OS that you could explore technically for years without even coming near mastery

>>75031 perhaps because there were no reasons to make web so complicated.

>>75031 On the web you are blindly groping your way through a labyrinth constructed by generations of engineers hacking soykaf on top of the already existing soykaf, piling it up until it's a giant poop tower. At the low level your main obstacles are physics and logic. It's *actually* engineering, not just trying to smack something together quickly and ship it.

>>75043 > labyrinth constructed by generations of engineers hacking soykaf on top of the already existing soykaf, piling it up until it's a giant poop tower. > At the low level your main obstacles are physics and logic. Allow me to introduce you to x86 https://github.com/corkami/docs/blob/master/x86/x86.md

>>75080 I'm familiar with x86, but I don't think it at all matches with what I described for browsers. For instance, the main difference between successive generations of processors is changes to the microarchitecture, not adding features on top of the existing microarchitecture. When features do get piled on top (e.g. AES extensions) it's a big deal. The fact that the core instruction set has been stable for a very long time doesn't mean that it's cruft -- it means that it works fine and microcoding makes it more favorable to have a stable instruction set than changing it up every five years. While the x86 ISA does have lots of oddities, none of them are likely to get in your way ever, and many of them (e.g. limits on register length) are due to fundamental limitations of the silicon. Furthermore the documentation of an actual processor is almost always much more complete than what you will get for any browser. Most of these oddities were probably taken directly from intel's documentation. Any chip that actually ships is more "finished" than any browser.

>>75031 Agreed, webdev has become so much more than just CSS,html+js. people forget that

>>75103 >people forget that They know and hate it. Nobody wants to learn constantly new frameworks that deprecate in a year because its just a collective waste of time.

Read CS:APP, Nand-to-Tetris, Patterson & Hennessy and learn C