Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen
From: davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Let's pretend
Keywords: Intel, 586, windows
Message-ID: <3060@crdos1.crd.ge.COM>
Date: 18 Dec 90 20:02:39 GMT
References: <3042@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> <1990Dec18.082623.16648@kithrup.COM> <15145@ogicse.ogi.edu>
Reply-To: davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corp R&D Center, Schenectady NY
Lines: 22

In article <15145@ogicse.ogi.edu> borasky@ogicse.ogi.edu (M. Edward Borasky) writes:

|          I think they made a mistake putting the co-processor ON CHIP;
| surely it would be faster if the floating point were done in a \
| specialized unit (386/387 style).  That way you can get faster floating
| point with other peoples' coprocessors (Weitek, for example).

  The 486 uses fewer cycles than the 386 for the same instructions. The
Weitek can still be added. The boards are easier to design, smaller, and
have less support logic, and are thus cheaper to build.

  If Intel and the board vendors were not recovering design cost and
making all the profit the market will bear, I think the 486 would be
cheaper than a 386+387. As it is, the prices are comparable, and the
cost performance is a lot better on the 486, at least at the system
level.

  How about a new subject line if you want to continue this, it's not
related to what could be added to the 586.
-- 
bill davidsen	(davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen)
    VMS is a text-only adventure game. If you win you can use unix.