Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!maverick.ksu.ksu.edu!matt.ksu.ksu.edu!rogerhef
From: rogerhef@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Roger Heflin)
Subject: Re: 486SX - Intel now telling lies
Message-ID: <1991May29.230433.10095@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu>
Sender: news@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu (The News Guru)
Nntp-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu
Organization: Kansas State University
References: <9105241448.AA14412@iecc.cambridge.ma.us> <1991May25.192449.27061@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> <1991May29.191233.18863@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> <1991May29.212337.7684@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov>
Date: Wed, 29 May 91 23:04:33 GMT
Lines: 41

In <1991May29.212337.7684@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov> kaleb@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov (Kaleb Keithley) writes:

>Considering street price for a full up 486 is about US$700-800, why
>would anyone want to pay $300 for the 486SX, plus $700 for the 487SX?

>Personally, I think if Intel can produce a i486, disable the FPU, and sell
>it for $250, while selling a i486 without disabling the FPU for $800
>(whether they call it an i486 or an i487SX is academic), that the whole 
>world should punish Intel for their arrogance by refusing to buy any 
>i486 product whatsoever.  

>Do they think we're stupid.  

>I wonder what's involved with re-enabling the FPU.  If I could buy an 
>i486SX for $250, enable the FPU and sell it for $800, I would.  Wouldn't 
>you?  What this whole thing really means, is that Intel can produce and 
>make a profit selling a i486 at $250.  They're gouging those of us who 
>buy the i486 an extra $550.  That's inexcusable.

You are assuming that the FPU that was disabled was good, especially since the
coprocessor part of the chip takes a a larger portion of the area of the chip
than the 486sx part, it means that any error in production is more likely to
be in that area of the chip.  Since they also will probably not be able to 
meet the demand for the 486 it would also not make sense to go disabling chips
that could be sold for $800 so they could sell them for $250. It probably   
wasn't, since using processor chips with bad coprocessors would increase 
their yield and therefore their profile from a single run.  
Also you are assuming that everyone wants a coprocessor, and
much of the market is made up of people running things like WP that need a
fast machine and lots of memory, but have no use for the coprocessor at 
all.  That is what they are targeting with th i486sx, is the people that
are not likely to need a coprocessor, but if they get a i486sx and later 
find that they need a coprocessor they have the option if they don't want
to upgrade their machine, but with the 486sx the entire objective is to
never get a coprocessor, it is for people that have no use for one, from
this standpoint it makes sense.    
--
Rogerhef@Matt.ksu.ksu.edu                        Roger Heflin
                                                 EECE Grad Student
                                                 (913) 532-5600