[comp.windows.ms.programmer] NeXT or What MS Does Wrong!

James_Bell@f6.n3601.z1.fidonet.org (James Bell) (05/02/91)

> Can anyone here explain (in a simple
> manner) what the 486SX is? Whats is the difference to the 386?
>
It's just a 486 without the built-in floating point unit.
JB

Joachim_Kainz@p11.f11.n310.z2.fidonet.org (Joachim Kainz) (05/02/91)

 > 486SX == 486 w/o "built in" coprocessor

486SX == 386 ?

Morrie_Wilson@p16.f8.n343.z1.fidonet.org (Morrie Wilson) (05/06/91)

 >> Can anyone here explain (in a simple
 >> manner) what the 486SX is? Whats is the difference
 > to the 386?
 > >
 > It's just a 486 without the built-in floating point unit.
 > JB
 >
 >
 
Actually, the skinny I've heard is that there are problems with the yields of 
the 486 processors with the built in co-processors.  So
Intel came up with the neat idea of being able to disable the co-processor and 
sell the result as a 486sx.
 
In actuality, the co-processor does not lend a whole lot of speed to most 
applications.  E.G.
 
Lets say an application is 10% floating point intensive.  Let say
the coprocessor can speed up that portion 10X.  The result is that
with the co-processor it runs in 91% of the time, for a total savings
of 9%.

melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (05/20/91)

In article <funpack111518@f1.n6000.z2.fidonet.org> Morrie_Wilson@p16.f8.n343.z1.fidonet.org (Morrie Wilson) writes:

   Actually, the skinny I've heard is that there are problems with the yields of 
   the 486 processors with the built in co-processors.  So
   Intel came up with the neat idea of being able to disable the co-processor and 
   sell the result as a 486sx.

   In actuality, the co-processor does not lend a whole lot of speed to most 
   applications.  E.G.

   Lets say an application is 10% floating point intensive.  Let say
   the coprocessor can speed up that portion 10X.  The result is that
   with the co-processor it runs in 91% of the time, for a total savings
   of 9%.

Like a speadsheet recalculation?  How about graphics?  Are all the
calculations done in integer math?  Do Adobe Type Manager or True Type
fonts require floating-point calculations?  I'm not sure, but I think
that there should be enough "real" world applications that it would be
nice to have a math co-processor.  And when the application does
require a co-processor it's going to be several(20? 30? 100 times?)
times slower w/o it.

-Mike