Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!bbn.com!aoa!rich
From: rich@aoa.UUCP (Rich Snow)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: 486SX - Intel now telling lies
Message-ID: <1561@aoa.UUCP>
Date: 22 May 91 15:13:13 GMT
Expires: 30 Jun 91 04:00:00 GMT
References: <1991May14.054200.28095@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <21020.282f6b40@oregon.uoregon.edu> <1991May14.200856.1431@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <1991May15.210339.17118@unlv.edu>
Reply-To: rich@aoa.utc.com (Rich Snow)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Adaptive Optics Assoc., Cambridge, Mass.
Lines: 25

In article <1991May15.210339.17118@unlv.edu> whitney@jimi.cs.unlv.edu (Lee Whitney) writes:
>If you have been following the threads on the 486sx you have probably
>heard alot of negative response to Intel's market ploys.
>
trade article:
>
> ....  In addition, the 20Mhz 486sx chip delivers a 40 percent greater
>performance than the 33Mhz 386 processor.  The rate of change from
>386-based systems to 486sx-based systems is expected to occur rapidly.
>
>Does anyone else have an idea as to the
>performance difference between the 486sx-20 and the 386-33?

They could be comparing a 486 using the builtin numeric coprocessor
to a 386 without a numeric coprocessor. Legitimate comparison,
but not likely that we'll see the performance benefit unless our swr
happens to use the coprocessor! (In fairness, 486 swr will use it 
more since it's always there...)

-Rich
-- 
*	Rich Snow  AOA-----------------*
*       (617)864-0201
*	rich@aoa.utc.com
*       aoa!rich@bbn.com