🚀 go-pugleaf

MYRON A LIEBERMAN (drchip@cup.portal.com) wrote:
: >Kevin Brewer (kevinb@unssun.nevada.edu) wrote:
: >: I'll admit it. I use a Mac. But I have a simple(?) question about the
: >: intel x86 CPU's. (If this is a FAQ, please direct me to the proper
: >: place as I don't read this news group.) So here goes...
: >:
: >: My brother-in-law just bought a 486SX machine. What is the difference
: >: between the 486SX and the _normal_ 486 chip? FPU? 16 v. 32 bits? ???
: >: Is there a _normal_ (full powered?) 486 chip? The 486DX?
: >:
: >: Thanks - Kevin
: >:
: >:
: >:
: >Kevin, read the thread on the question above this one regarding
: >386SX bus widths.
: >
: That won't answer his question. The 486SX is a 486 without a built-in
: coprocessor but otherwise the same as the 486 (original) or 486DX. The
: 386SX has reduced address bus (24 bit) and data bus (16 bit). There is
: no coprocessor issue with the 386 since no 386 has a built-in coprocessor.

	486-DX,486-SX,487-SX is the same die but they use difference bonding
and package.

	The released of 486-SX is used to offer a high performance CPU and
same price of AMD 386-40. The Co-process in the die is disabled by intel.
Because those die a selected from 486 production line that the co-processor
part was failed during production.

	One of my friend try to insert a 487-sx into the 486-dx socket.
As the result, the computer can boot up and run all of programs.

487-sx have one pin more than 486-dx.

Michael Lo