From owner-freebsd-stable Thu Dec 12 17:13:31 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CDFA37B401 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:13:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from pasiphae.parad.net (pcp991894pcs.nchrls01.sc.comcast.net [68.59.35.253]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8EFA43EC5 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:13:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jdisher@parad.net) Received: from localhost (jdisher@localhost) by pasiphae.parad.net (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id gBD1DRa17848 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:13:28 -0500 Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:13:27 -0500 (EST) From: Jonathan Disher X-X-Sender: jdisher@pasiphae To: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Cyrix CPUs, was: Re: Repeatable crash from nautilus2 In-Reply-To: <001b01c2a242$7c966ed0$0301a8c0@prime> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Charles Swiger wrote: > Rhett Monteg Hollander wrote: > [ ... ] > > By the way, have never understood such a despise to > > Cyrix CPUs. They were the best integer performers of > > late 1990s, and quite reasonably priced. > > I believe the Cyrix CPUs had a slightly different exception frame layout > compared with a genuine Intel CPU, and tended to cause some non-Microsoft OS'es > to panic whenever the system lad got high or a multithreaded app was run. > (IIRC...) It wasn't limited to non-Microsoft OS's. WindowsNT refused to successfully install on Cyrix CPUs (and I think Windows98 didn't work well either)... It was specifically excluded from the NT HCL. And I've seen firsthand that they dislike each other. -j To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message