486 vs 386 (was Development, round II)

From: kroma <kroma_at_worldnet.att.net>
Date: Fri Jan 30 19:58:49 1998

>And you'll have to pardon my ignorance of the Intel parts after the 8085,
>but why wouldn't a 386 work if the 486 works? (Other than the speed
>difference.) It has always been my impression that few OS's/applications
>need whatever extra software features that differentiate the 486 from the
386.


I believe the 486 was supposed to be just a 386 with a built-in math
co-processor. Then Intel came out with the 486SX. Which was really just a
broken DX, a 486 in which the built-in math co-processor didn't work.

        -- Kirk
Received on Fri Jan 30 1998 - 19:58:49 GMT