Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!mit-eddie!think!ames!oliveb!intelca!mipos3!kds
From: kds@mipos3.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: 64 Vs 32
Message-ID: <540@mipos3.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 16-Mar-87 15:26:09 EST
Article-I.D.: mipos3.540
Posted: Mon Mar 16 15:26:09 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 18-Mar-87 02:31:22 EST
References: <3810013@nucsrl.UUCP> <28200016@ccvaxa>
Reply-To: kds@mipos3.UUCP (Ken Shoemaker ~)
Organization: Intel, Santa Clara, CA
Lines: 24

In article <28200016@ccvaxa> aglew@ccvaxa.UUCP writes:
>virtual address and I've seen articles saying that the 80386 has a 16T
>address space (Milutinovc in last month's computer).  What are the
>exact specs on the 80386?

the 386 has a 32-bit physical address bus brought out of the chip.  Internally,
the chip can address 2**14, 2**32 byte segments, so that is where the maximum
size of the address space (2**46) comes in.  Note that internally, the
segmented address space is transformed into a 32-bit "linear" address space
which is presented to the paging unit, which transforms it to the 32-bit
physical address space.  So, what you get is a 32-bit "flat" machine, or
a 32-bit machine with a much larger segmented memory space.  As was said about
the HP "Precision" machine, this may not quite what this discussion is about,
since it still is a 32-bit machine.
-- 
The above views are personal.

The primary reason innumeracy is so pernicious is the ease with which numbers
are invoked to bludgeon the innumerate into dumb acquiescence.
			- John Allen Paulos

Ken Shoemaker, Microprocessor Design, Intel Corp., Santa Clara, California
uucp: ...{hplabs|decwrl|amdcad|qantel|pur-ee|scgvaxd|oliveb}!intelca!mipos3!kds
csnet/arpanet: kds@mipos3.intel.com