>Thank you very much. I would like to learn a bit more, for example,
>why "x86" for 32 bit? 86 = 32? Seems rather cryptic to me. Can you
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>>> Many thanks
>>> Kate
That explains the "x86", but I`m even more intrigued now. Was the
number 80386 chosen at random, or does it have some significance?
After all, it`s not divisible by 32. I can see I shall have to have a
search of Wikipedia. Thanks for putting me on the trail :-)
Kate
> The original 32-bit Intel CPU used in PCs was the 80386, which was
> followed by the 80486 and Pentium (sometimes called the 586). The
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
>>>> Many thanks
>>>> Kate
Peter Duniho - 07 Dec 2007 23:37 GMT
> That explains the "x86", but I`m even more intrigued now. Was the
> number 80386 chosen at random, or does it have some significance?
> After all, it`s not divisible by 32. I can see I shall have to have a
> search of Wikipedia. Thanks for putting me on the trail :-)
Wikipedia may elaborate for you. I think this article is a decent
starting point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8086
Jack's explanation isn't really complete, as the 32-bit-ness of the CPU is
irrelevant to the actual origin of x86. The "original" x86 CPU was the
8086, a 16-bit CPU. The original IBM PC used the 8088, an 8-bit version
of the 8086 (well, it had an 8-bit data bus, anyway). "x86" is used to
describe the entire line of CPUs that evolved from that beginning, and/or
the instruction set (e.g. AMD, Cyrix x86-compatible CPUs).
In other words, x86 isn't used to refer to 32-bit. It's used to refer to
an entire class of CPUs and their instruction sets. The marketing
genuises have simply complicated the issue by using x64 to refer to the
64-bit iteration of the x86 line. This has led to a sort of retro-active
re-definition of x86 as meaning 32-bit, but that's not really what it
means.
Kind of dumb, IMHO, but then I find most marketing kind of dumb (including
the term ".NET" :) ).
Pete
Jack Jackson - 08 Dec 2007 07:15 GMT
The initial Intel CPU with a 16-bit bus was the 8086, then came the
80186, 80286, 80386, 80486 and the Pentium, which was sometimes called
the 80586. So essentially the number before the 86 is just a version
number.
>That explains the "x86", but I`m even more intrigued now. Was the
>number 80386 chosen at random, or does it have some significance?
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
>>>>> Many thanks
>>>>> Kate
Kate - 08 Dec 2007 15:31 GMT
Thank you Jack and Peter for the extra info. I am still going to
follow up the Wikipedia article, but now that I know the numbers
before the 86 have no esoteric significance, I shall not waste time
trying to find out.
Kate
> The initial Intel CPU with a 16-bit bus was the 8086, then came the
> 80186, 80286, 80386, 80486 and the Pentium, which was sometimes
[quoted text clipped - 53 lines]
>>>>>> Many thanks
>>>>>> Kate