4 ms·
What I find interesting, is no one ever remembers the Intel 386, and no one will ever forget the AMD 386/DX 40. Partly because the prevalent intel's were often
by supernovae 5y ago
What I find interesting, is no one ever remembers the Intel 386, and no one will ever forget the AMD 386/DX 40.
Partly because the prevalent intel's were often those over priced 386 sx/16s and really Intel didn't gain much wind until the 486 dx2 66 and more importantly, the pentium 1 and pentium 3 - but fabs really weren't make or break until p4 and beyond when they became a manufacturing competitive advantage in die size
- phicoh 5y agoI agree that the 386 was realitively rare. I still have one. And I remember how long it was between Intel's original announcement and 386 class becoming mainstream in PCs. However, at the time the 386 was announced I read an article about it. And that was long before I even had access to a 286. But it shaped me in thinking, let's skip the 286, and wait for the real thing right around the corner: 32 bits and an MMU.
- supernovae 5y agoyup, it's so weird we used to champion the "DX" over "SX" but reality is - some cache would have probably meant more to consumers in the end. BUT.. i loved it back then.. so many choices... and a few mhz did immensely matter. Breaking 100mhz - HUGE deal.. then 233... then 500 and once AMD hit 1ghz on their k5s they were top dog and stopped trying for the longest time and intel ate their lunch from then on up until Ryzen fun times :)