[CCTALK] transistor counts again

From: Dwight K. Elvey <dwightk.elvey_at_amd.com>
Date: Wed May 15 12:41:29 2002

>From: "Fred Cisin (XenoSoft)" <cisin_at_xenosoft.com>
>
>> > The 4004 was once rumored to have been named that because it had the
>> > equivalent of 4004 transistors.
>> > THAT is what probably gave rise to the 68000 silliness.
>> > It's MUCH more impressive what was done with only 486!
>
>On Wed, 15 May 2002, Andreas Freiherr wrote:
>> Shoudn't that read "80486"?
>only if we stick with intel!
>
>That's what was so impressive about the Cyrix 486SLC, was that it DIDN'T
>have the other 80,000! 'course it always seemed more like a fast 80386 to
>me.
>And the K6 does a really nice job with 6144!
>and how about the Z80, V20, etc.?
>

Hi
 What are you guys talking about. The K6 has millions of transistors,
as does the 486.
Dwight
Received on Wed May 15 2002 - 12:41:29 BST