From owner-freebsd-hardware Fri Jun 21 00:47:19 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id AAA29956 for hardware-outgoing; Fri, 21 Jun 1996 00:47:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from portal.spi.net ([199.238.225.153]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA29951; Fri, 21 Jun 1996 00:47:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MindBender.HeadCandy.com (root@MindBender.HeadCandy.com [199.238.225.168]) by portal.spi.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id AAA01144; Fri, 21 Jun 1996 00:47:13 -0700 Received: from localhost.HeadCandy.com (michaelv@localhost.HeadCandy.com [127.0.0.1]) by MindBender.HeadCandy.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id AAA01382; Fri, 21 Jun 1996 00:47:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606210747.AAA01382@MindBender.HeadCandy.com> X-Authentication-Warning: MindBender.HeadCandy.com: Host michaelv@localhost.HeadCandy.com [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol To: "Andrew V. Stesin" cc: jhs@freebsd.org, hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Cyrix and AMD chips In-reply-to: Your message of Fri, 21 Jun 96 10:23:35 +0300. <199606210723.KAA26369@office.elvisti.kiev.ua> Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 00:47:11 -0700 From: "Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk ># Only certainty is: AMD chips are Not always plug compatible. > I 100% agree -- not always compatible; not to mention the fact > that early Enhanced Am486 chips were ummm... say, crap, > and non-enhanced ones generally sucked, too -- compared to Intel. I *strongly* disagree. What vintage chips are you speaking of? Yes, there were some bad chips at the beginning, but that has been remedied *long* ago. I'll even let you have the early Enhanced ones (which I just don't know about, because I didn't pay any attention to them when they were first released). How much better did Intel's early Enhanced (by this you're referring to write-back cache, correct?) chips work? When you say "non-enhanced" ones generally sucked, do you mean all the chips before the DX4s? If so, you're just plain in outer space. I have had a 5-volt 486DX2 80MHz (one of the first ones made -- bought it right when they were released). It is a very solidly made chip. It has been pushed very hard at times, and has never flinched. It's as reliable as any computer I have used. I have experience with *many* other people running similar AMD CPUs. To say they "generally suck" is to be totally misinformed. To say they aren't always plug compatible, though there is a massive weight of evidence against it, I could be convinced to believe in certain odd situations. > But just now wer'e speaking about (comparatively new) > AMD 5x133 chip. That's plain different story. _This_ > particular chip is really nice, do you agree? Yes. Really nice. Just like my AMD 486DX2/80 when I first bought it. :-) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael L. VanLoon michaelv@HeadCandy.com --< Free your mind and your machine -- NetBSD free un*x >-- NetBSD working ports: 386+PC, Mac 68k, Amiga, Atari 68k, HP300, Sun3, Sun4/4c/4m, DEC MIPS, DEC Alpha, PC532, VAX, MVME68k, arm32... NetBSD ports in progress: PICA, others... Roll your own Internet access -- Seattle People's Internet cooperative. If you're in the Seattle area, ask me how. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------