Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!nih-csl!lhc!ncifcrf!haven!udel!wuarchive!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!ucbvax!agate!linus!linus!gateway!carlson
From: carlson@gateway (Bruce Carlson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: Info needed: AMD 80C287 chip
Message-ID: <125194@linus.mitre.org>
Date: 2 Nov 90 13:25:52 GMT
References: <1990Nov1.221515.15575@nntp-server.caltech.edu>
Sender: usenet@linus.mitre.org
Reply-To: carlson@gateway (Bruce Carlson)
Organization: The Mitre Corporation
Lines: 17

In article <1990Nov1.221515.15575@nntp-server.caltech.edu> xiaohe@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Xiao-He Zhang) writes:
>I am planning to add a co-processor for my AT compatible and just see this
>287 chip (AMD 80C287) advertised in PC Mag at ~$100, manufactured by the
>Advanced Micro Devices.  This is far cheaper than an Intel 287 chip.  It is
>claimed to be compatible with Intel's 80287.  My question is: is it true?
>Any comments, experiences, suggestions?  Thanks a lot in advance!
>X. Zhang

The newest Byte magazine has a comparison of the coprocessors.  A quick
synopsis is that the AMD chip is good (compatible), but slightly slower
performance than the Intel XL80287 or the IIT coprocessor chip.  However, 
the AMD chip is about half the cost or less, so it may be worth it to give
up a little performance.


Bruce Carlson
carlson@gateway.mitre.org