Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!csun!kithrup!sef
From: sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: 486 and FPUs (was Re: Let's pretend)
Keywords: Intel, 586, windows
Message-ID: <1990Dec19.051616.3763@kithrup.COM>
Date: 19 Dec 90 05:16:16 GMT
References: <1990Dec18.082623.16648@kithrup.COM> <15145@ogicse.ogi.edu> <3060@crdos1.crd.ge.COM>
Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd.
Lines: 16

In article <3060@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.com (bill davidsen) writes:
>  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.

Yes, but the Cyrix '387 clone uses fewer cycles than the '486's on-chip FPU.
But you can only add it in a mode similar to the Weitek (i.e., memory
mapped).  Which is not used by any currently existing code (although I
*would* like to write a '387 emulator for the '386 using the Weitek... 8-)).
(Note that that should actually be, "much existing code.")

-- 
Sean Eric Fagan  | "I made the universe, but please don't blame me for it;
sef@kithrup.COM  |  I had a bellyache at the time."
-----------------+           -- The Turtle (Stephen King, _It_)
Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.