🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jul29.100549.1@qucdntri.ee.queensu.ca>, morton@qucdntri.ee.queensu.ca writes:
| Anybody heard any more rumours on the "586" coming out soon? What I've heard,
| is that Intel has gone to a completely new architecture, and micro-instruction
| set, while putting a 386 chip on board for backwards compatability. 

Fact: Intel says the chip will be delayed until 1Q93.
Rumor: Intel can't decide what to call it (I doubt that)
Runor: Intel can't get the yield up to useful levels. (I can't think of
       any other reason to delay, can you).

Fact: EE Times published a diagram which had a 386, RISC CPU, and FPU
      along with the usual cache and memory stuff.
Rumor: in CISC mode the chip is no faster than a 486 (same speed)
Rumor: in CISC mode the chip a 2X faster than a 486
Rumor: The FPU is 7X faster than a 486
Rumor: The FPU is 2X faster than a 486
Rumor: The FPU doesn't use IEEE arithmetic internally (I don't believe
       that for a moment)
Rumor: the CPU and FPU are from an 860
Rumor: the CPU and FPU are from an 960
Rumor: The CPU is a new RISC and Intel will drop the (pick one) 860 or 960

Fact: there are more rumors than facts
Fact: The rumors contradict each other

Opinion: Intel is being really silly about this, solid info on
         performance levels would allow corporate planners to think
         about the Intel based chip where now they think about RISC. I
         would say Intel isn't aiming at this market, but RISC+CISC only
         fits in a new O/S with DOS processes, unless they think people
         will buy the chip to use the RISC for Windows3 service. The
         future of the P5 looks like {UNIX,OS/2,NT}.
-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
	It never ceases to amaze me that otherwise rational people, able to
	understand calculus, compound interest, and the income tax form, can
	continue to believe that poker is a game of chance.