Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!paperboy!hsdndev!cmcl2!tester
From: tester@cmcl2.nyu.edu (L Testerville)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: How much for a 487SX?!!
Message-ID: <1991May2.172726.21630@cmcl2.nyu.edu>
Date: 2 May 91 17:27:26 GMT
References: <13471.281da4bf@ecs.umass.edu> <1991May1.131401.10245@cbnewsh.att.com> <1991May1.214432.15762@cmcl2.nyu.edu> <1991May1.233459.1062@eng.umd.edu> <goldberg.673147173@pv01a0.vincent.iastate.edu>
Distribution: na
Organization: New York University
Lines: 15

goldberg@iastate.edu (Goldberg Adam Michael) writes:
>In <1991May1.233459.1062@eng.umd.edu> crouse@eng.umd.edu (Gil Crouse) writes:
>Of course, the whole 486SX thing is a big scam for Intel.  The difference
>between a 486SX & DX?  The SX has the internal math processor (all 486DXs
>have the math co-processor built-in) disabled.  So the 487SX is actually
>a 486DX in disguise.  What it amounts to is Intel trying to scam us into
>believing that we're better off getting a 486SX for the same prices as
>an AMD 386-40.  

>Personally I'd rather buy an inferior chip from AMD than a better one from
>Intel.  Increased competition -> lower prices -> more competition.

>Just say No (to Intel).

I'm glad SOMEone has gotten to the point here...