home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
- Path: sparky!uunet!zeos!jre
- From: jre@zeos.com (Jim Erickson)
- Subject: Re: 486SL dropped, vendors test Cyrix
- Organization: Zeos International, Ltd
- Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 16:42:48 GMT
- Message-ID: <1993Jan11.164248.26537@zeos.com>
- References: <C0E0zB.DwG@inews.Intel.COM> <C0npry.AKI@wimsey.bc.ca> <1ireaeINN6uv@lynx.unm.edu>
- Lines: 37
-
-
- Bunch of stuff deleted for brevity.
-
- In article <1ireaeINN6uv@lynx.unm.edu> kholland@hydra.unm.edu (Kiernan Holland) writes:
- >In article <C0npry.AKI@wimsey.bc.ca> bhenning@wimsey.bc.ca (Bill Henning) writes:
-
- >>
- >>Comparing 486SX performance to 486SLC performance is an apple-vs-orange
- >>comparison - the 486SX has a 32 bit bus, and the 486SLC has a 16 bit bus.
- >
- >I don't think that is right. I think all 486 and 386 CPU's have to be 32-bit
- >except for the 386-sx's which are 286's with 386 internals. Nobody
- >hardly uses 286's or 386sx's anymore.
- >
-
- All _Intel_ 486 and 386 CPUs have 32-bit bus interfaces except the 386SX which
- has a 16-bit interface. The Cyrix 486SLC is designed to be replacment for the
- 386SX and therefore has a 16-bit interface. The Cyrix 486DLC is designed as a
- replacement for the 386DX and has a 32-bit interface.
-
- >>
- >>A more balanced comparison would be between a 486SX and a 486DLC at the
- >>same clock speed - and I would expect the 486SX to win by about 10% at
- >>the same clock speed.
- >>I am surprised Rod Skinner did not notice the discrepancy.
- >>
- >>Bill
- >>
- >
-
- ---JRE---
-
- --
- Jim Erickson ZZZZ EEEE OO SSSS ZEOS International, Ltd.
- support@zeos.com INET Z E O O S Technical Support Dept.
- uunet!zeos!support UUCP Z EE O O SSS 1301 Industrial Blvd. N.E.
- Any opinions expressed Z E O O S Minneapolis, MN 55413
-