🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan4.155415.2710@crd.ge.com> davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen) writes:
>
>  I see in this week's _PC Week_ that Intel has dropped most of it's
>line of previously promised 486SL CPUs, particularly the clock doubling
>models. This leaves vendors who had invested in designing systems
>without a 3.3v CPU from Intel. The article goes on to say that AST and
>Dell have evaluated using the Cyrix 486SLC.
>
I think that the PC Week article states that Intel is incorporating the
features into its main product lines.  That would imply a stronger
commitment to these features than a product designed for portable
computing.  

Another interesting article comparing the Intel486 SX processor and the
Cyrix SLC is in InfoWorld December 21 page 48 "Reviews/Product
Comparisons: 25-MHz 486 Notebooks".  InfoWorld seems to come to the
conclusion that the Intel486 SX processors are 35% to 40% FASTER than
the Cyrix parts.  They use several examples but the most powerful is two
machines from TI: TravelMate 4000 WinSX/25 and the TravelMate WinSLC.
Both weigh 6 pounds with battery.  Similarly configured machines yield
SYSmark92 results of 75.93 (Intel486 SX) and 47.23 (Cyrix).  They
indicate that Cyrix system "posted a SYSmark92 close to 38 percent
slower than its 486SX/25 sibling."

SYSMark92 suite is a standard set of applications that are stimulated in
a repeatable manner using a set of commands that the BAPCo organization
developed after talking to 5000 users of these applications.  The
applications include spreadsheets (123, Excel, Quattro), word processors
(WordPerfect, WFW), data base (Paradox, dBase), presentation software,
graphics applications (Harvard), software development (MSC, Borland C).
These are the things most PC users regularly use and if not the
composite SYSMark92 metric, then the individual catagory metrics should
provide one with the ability to predict system performance on their
workload.

rod


>  A mailing list I get indicated that Intel is selling so many of the
>486-66 chips that they are dedecating fab lines to that chip instead of
>meeting promises for the SL chips and the P5. The source was only
>identified as "an Intel source" so take that for what it's worth.
>Another rumor indicated that they couldn't make the clock doubling chips
>run at 3.3v due to process problems. The source for that is not even
>identified.
>
>  John Donovan (WorkGroup Tech, Inc, NH) said this "Brings into what is
>the added value of that architecture?" It's not clear if he meant just
>the 486SL or Intel 486 chips in general.
>
>-- 
>bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
>    Keyboard controller has been disabled, press F1 to continue.


Rod Skinner				I speak for myself only.
Intel Corp
2200 Mission College Blvd RN4-21          PH (408) 765-4474
Santa Clara, CA 95052                     FAX (408) 765-4920