Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!att!rutgers!ucsd!usc!samsung!uunet!ibmpa!ibmsupt!jsalter
From: jsalter@slo.tcspa.ibm.com (James Salter)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: Compaq find problem with chip
Message-ID: <2940@ibmpa.UUCP>
Date: 16 Nov 89 03:29:36 GMT
Sender: news@ibmpa.UUCP
Reply-To: jsalter@ibmsupt.UUCP (James Salter)
Organization: IBM AWD, Palo Alto
Lines: 24

In article <1536@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:
>  While I would not hesitatte to use one of te old 386's in a 16 bit
>environment (with the machine properly labeled of course) I would not
>use one of the flawed 486's for anything. I sort of hope I can persuade
>Intel to give me one, even burned out if they wish, for a big hi-tech
>tie tack ;-)

Oh come on.  You're saying you won't use the 486 because of the floating
point problems, but would use the 386 (and presumably the 387) despite the
387's known, unpublished, hardware problems???  (I know you didn't say the
387, but you seem to imply it by pointing out only 486 Floating Point
flaws which don't appear to occur anywhere near as often as the flaws which
afflict the 387.)

>--
>bill davidsen  (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen)

PS:  Of couse their 387 emulator isn't afflicted by the flaws (obviously,
since the problems are in the microcode) but if you're going to do any
floating point work, you aren't going to be satisfied with emulation.

jim/jsalter   IBM AWD   T465/(415)855-4427    VNET: JSALTER at PALOALTO
UUCP: ..!uunet!ibmsupt!jsalter               Disc: Any opinions are mine.
IP: ibmsupt!jsalter@uunet.uu.net                 "PS/2 it, or DIE!"