Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 07:24:35 +0100 From: Wilko Bulte <wkb@freebie.demon.nl> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@FreeBSD.ORG>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RANDOMDEV inspired realitycheck regarding i386/i486... Message-ID: <20001115072435.E1321@freebie.demon.nl> In-Reply-To: <200011151723.KAA12325@usr01.primenet.com>; from tlambert@primenet.com on Wed, Nov 15, 2000 at 05:23:26PM %2B0000 References: <20001114075729.G333@freebie.demon.nl> <200011151723.KAA12325@usr01.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Nov 15, 2000 at 05:23:26PM +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: > > > > What is the consensus ? > > > > > > What is the current processor of choice for embedded stuff? Is > > > x86 even a good architecture for embedded work? That is the > > > only place that I would see the 386 still being alive... > > > > x86 has never been a good CPU for embedded. [eyes his trusty books > > collection for Motorola's 680x0 ;) ] > > The Motorola strategy is broken; the processor they are selling > for Palm Pilots has no MMU. It's no good for most embedded work > (and is barely good enough for making Palm Pilots unstable with > one single bad program). I could not care less about Palmpilots to be honest. Not an embedded application by my standards btw. > Cyrix, AMD, and various Card PCs are all 386-class CPUs. The > IBM "Blue Lightning" core is a 386 class core, which is used > to implement macrocell based embedded ASICs. Intel has two > 386 macrocells that are used for embedded work. I'd have to > say that not even the 80186 was dead yet... Sure, macrocells are used quite often. -- Wilko Bulte Arnhem, the Netherlands wilko@freebsd.org http://www.freebsd.org http://www.nlfug.nl To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001115072435.E1321>