From: Andrew Webber (awebber_at_wwwebbers.com)
Date: Tue Jul 17 2001 - 00:13:29 EDT
On Mon, 16 Jul 2001 23:16:04 -0400 (EDT), Philip R. Mann wrote:
>On Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:58:51 -0400, Cottrell, Eric wrote:
>
>>My favorite example was when 386 was popular you
>>could get a 80387 floating point processor for $40
>>and the older 8087 floating point processor was
>>still $400.
>
>The 386 had the floating point processor built-in.
>It was the 386x (?) which didn't. Seem to recall
>that the 386x started out as a bad bunch of 386s
>but Intel found there was a demand for a cheaper chip.
I thought it was the 486sx that was the 486 with the FP disabled
(or defective). The 386sx was 32bit internal and 16bit external or
something, wasn't it? (It's been so long).
I do recall a bit of a stink because Intel used the "SX" suffix for
two completely different meanings (except that both were less
capable).
andrew [awebber_at_wwwebbers.com]
...re-addicted to DC since 2001-06-10.
------
for PGP public key, send email with "send public key" as subject
current local weather:
www.cnn.com/WEATHER/ce/Ontario/OttawaYOW.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:57:24 EST