Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!thyme!kaleb
From: kaleb@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov (Kaleb Keithley)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: 80486 expert opinion wanted ...
Message-ID: <1990Dec28.153413.22793@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov>
Date: 28 Dec 90 15:34:13 GMT
References: <3370002@hpsgwp.sgp.hp.com>
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
Lines: 22

In article  plim@hpsgwp.sgp.hp.com (Peter Lim) writes:
>I am currently evaluating a 486 board with OPTI cache controller. The
>manual claim that the 486 is revision B6 (but it is not printed on the
>CPU itself). How can I find out if the chip is really B6 revision one ?

The rev. no. is printed on the bottom of the chip, you can't see it unless
you remove the cpu from the board.  Feeling lucky?  If so, you can carefully
pry out cpu and look.  Otherwise you have to take your vendors' word.

>I have an urgent question. How do I ensure that a 486 CPU is not a dud ?
>I have heard before that revision B5 and earlier of the 486 chip has a
>defect which causes the chip to fail under UNIX or similar protected mode
>OS. I have also heard that revision B6 and onward is fine. Then, what 
>changes are there from B6 to C0 or C1 revisions ?

My B5 works flawlessly with ESIX (UNIX) and OS/2.

-- 
Kaleb Keithley                      Jet Propulsion Labs
kaleb@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov

Offensive quote coming soon to a .signature file near you.