From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Jun 28 09:05:09 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA10226 for questions-outgoing; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 09:05:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tombstone.sunrem.com (tombstone.sunrem.com [206.81.134.54]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA10221 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 09:05:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from brandon@localhost) by tombstone.sunrem.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA00740; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 09:51:58 -0600 Date: Fri, 28 Jun 1996 09:51:57 -0600 (MDT) From: Brandon Gillespie To: Eduardo Costa cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Cyrix Processors In-Reply-To: <31D3C960.46DD@supra.pt> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > I would like to know if anyone has already tested the "new" Cyrix P166+ > processor with FreeBSD, and if there are any known bugs, because we are > thinking of upgrading our server to a Cyrix P166+, 64 Mb memory, 2.1Gb > HD, and, before it, you would like to now something about the Cyrix... I'm running a FreeBSD box on a Cyrix P150+ without problem. Two items to note: * The Cyrix will report as a 486, so you will not get any of the 586 kernel optimizations (Somebody mentioned that the Cyrix chip did not implement a full 586 instruction set, but I was under the impression the Cyrix P150+ chips implemented the full 686 instruction set *shrug*). * They compare it to a P150/P166 etc, yet its floating point is NOT comparable. However, its fixed precision mathematics are faster, which is what I assume they are using to average the comparison. If you are going to have a server with a lot of floating math an intel chip would be a better choice, if you are simply going to have a general server then the Cyrix chip would be a better chip (IMHO) -Brandon Gillespie