🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Bu9urG.7zu@nntp-sc.Intel.COM>, dmccart@gomez.intel.com (D. J.
McCarthy) says:
>
>The following are just my opinions and not Intel's.
>
>Daniel Moran (daniel.moran@pcb.batpad.lgb.ca.us) wrote:
>> jas37876@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (John A. Slagel) writes:
>>> I can, all things considered, upgrade my non-coprocessed 386-33,
>>> to the Cyrix 486-33 for ~$150.
>>> Is there problems with this chip ??
>> Ditto on that request. I'm extremely interested in this chip. My
>> understanding is that it does not have an on-board math coprocessor; but
>> I'm more interested in the cache and pipelining anyway. I'm running a
>> clone motherboard with a very recent AMI BIOS. Any comments? Anyone
>> who's done this upgrade?
>
>
>From what I've read, the Cyrix chip:
>
>1) Has a hardware multiplier instead of a full-blown math co-processor
>2) Has a 1K cache instead of the 8K on an Intel 486
>3) Is pin-compatible with Intel 386's, although you can't just pop out your
>   i386 and plop in the Cyrix chip; you will have to replace at least the
>   BIOS and probably the motherboard too.
>

     Yikes! A friend from school was thinking of upgrading his
Opti 386-25DX motherboard bought last November with the
Cyrix 486DLC chips.  He's running OS/2 on his machine right now.
Would anyone know if Cyrix offers a money back guarantee?
-------
------------------------------+      All The Best,
Reply To:                     |
                              |      Edward Galarza,
     I18BC@CunyVM.Cuny.Edu    |      Brooklyn College Of The
     I18BC@CunyVM.BitNet      |      City University Of New York
------------------------------+      "Que viva el OS/2!"
New accounts above 8-)