🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <dchiuCrw7wr.HFw@netcom.com> dchiu@netcom.com (David C.W. Chiu) writes:
>In article <CrtuEB.F0v@allegro.com>, Stan Sieler <sieler@allegro.com> wrote:
>>Kim Naru (CONTRA) (knaru@cup.hp.com) wrote:

>>: :         I'm considering purchasing a used 486-66 SLC-2 based clone using
>>: : an Alaris ISA motherboard, and a Cirrus logic SVGA card.

>>I think the 486 SLC is the Cyrix chip?  If yes, then the answer is: NO.

>Remember however,
>SLC does use 16bit external data bus that WILL pose performance penality,
>despite of its larger cache (16k vs. 8k, for IBM and Intel respectively)

In article <2uclr2$svm@agate.berkeley.edu> tox@remarque.berkeley.edu () 
writes:
>The SLC is made by IBM using 486SX technology licensed from Intel with the
>restriction that the chips can only be sold mounted to the motherboards, not
>loose. The SLC has a 16K cache as opposed to the normal 8K, which Robert
>Mitchell mentioned.

I'm confused.  My understanding is that for Intel 486 chips, SX means "no 
floating point unit", but is still 32-bit.  For 386 chips, SX meant "16 bit".
If the SLC is based on "486SX technology licensed from Intel", then the SLC 
ought to be 32-bit.  Now, if it were based on 386SX technology, that would be 
a different story.  It would also explain why Intel was so generous to IBM.