[NTLUG:Discuss] CPU History

[Chris Cox]

Vaidya, Harshal (Cognizant) wrote:
> This is like Chinese to me!
> Care to explain this it for a layman???

I believe the original intent was to show the
relative performance/feature increases from generation
to generation of both the Intel CPU line
and the AMD CPU line.  Also show the amount
of time/effort spent on the generation.

You may have to be more specific with regards
to your questions on the material in order to
get a clearer answer than that.

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Simmons [mailto:dsimmons at powersmiths.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 12:50 AM
> To: discuss at ntlug.org
> Subject: [NTLUG:Discuss] CPU History
> 
> 
> Thought you might like this 'mini-history' lesson of CPU design from a
> computer engineer down in Florida....- Dave
> 
> ------------------------------------------------
> 
> Brian Ashe pointed out this PBS-Cringely article to me:
> http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20021226.html
> 
> In it, he states:
>     "When Intel introduced the 486 processor, it came with
>      a 100 percent increase in the number of instructions
>      executed per clock cycle compared to the 386 processor
>      that preceded it.  When the Pentium came along, it
>      offered a 90 percent increase in instructions per clock
>      cycle.  The Pentium Pro had a 40 percent increase in
>      instructions per clock cycle over the Pentium.  The
>      Pentium II and III offered only a 20 percent improvement
>      over the Pentium Pro.  And the Pentium 4 is worst of all,
>      rated at 10 percent FEWER instructions per clock cycle
>      than the Pentium III."

historical stuff snipped... see prior messages....