Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!acsu.buffalo.edu
From: jones@acsu.buffalo.edu (terry a jones)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: AMD386-DX
Message-ID: <70411@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>
Date: 11 Apr 91 18:36:58 GMT
References: <1032@stewart.UUCP> <69454@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> <3672@sixhub.UUCP>
Sender: news@acsu.Buffalo.EDU
Organization: SUNY Buffalo
Lines: 24
Nntp-Posting-Host: beatrix.eng.buffalo.edu

In article <3672@sixhub.UUCP> davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:
>In article <69454@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> jones@acsu.buffalo.edu (terry a jones) writes:
>
>| 	I'm waiting to see if someone other than Intel offers us such a
>| solution since it seems as though the legal precedence has been established.
>| Refer to the second portion of my original article.  All AMD has to do is
>| be careful what they name the device. ;)
>
>  AMI has the right to use Intel microcode. However, there is a lot more
>to the chip than microcode, and I don't know if the right to microcode
>in the FPU has been established.
>

	Agreed.  But I'm not sure why they'd want to license Intel's FPU
microcode.  I'd rather see them use Cyrix's 80387 clone on the die.  Or
something along those lines.  I don't know how Cyrix went about producing
their dies for the FPU, I doubt they licensed microcode to do it.

	Terry



Terry Jones   				{rutgers,uunet}!acsu.buffalo.edu!jones
SUNY at Buffalo ECE Dept.	  or: rutgers!ub!jones, jones@acsu.buffalo.edu