Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 11:46:33 -0800 (PST) From: "Jamil J. Weatherbee" <jamil@trojanhorse.ml.org> To: John Kelly <mouth@ibm.net> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Newest Pentium bug (fatal) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971109114430.1431B-100000@trojanhorse.ml.org> In-Reply-To: <3466035d.2461408@smtp-gw01.ny.us.ibm.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is the same reason I trust the CYRIX 6x86, it is a damn hyperactive 486. In fact I held onto my 486-120 for quite some time, if they had only increased the cache and memory bandwidth on those things, keep the damn thing simple you intel bastards. On Sun, 9 Nov 1997, John Kelly wrote: > On Sun, 9 Nov 1997 03:08:14 -0600 (CST), Jim Bryant > <jbryant@unix.tfs.net> wrote: > > >this is going to be a real nightmare for intel... how many pentiums > >are out there, and i'm begionning to notice a lot of pentium-specific > >stuff out there now. the instruction seqquence in question seems to > >me to be a type that will be in widespread use in the very near > >future. > > Now I'm really glad I bought a bunch of 486 processors and VLB > motherboards on closeout. :-) > > John > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.971109114430.1431B-100000>