Post AspBkYKugudnXpjl3Y by hisham_hm@mastodon.social
(DIR) More posts by hisham_hm@mastodon.social
(DIR) Post #AspBkVVRDKHElbdcXo by hisham_hm@mastodon.social
2025-04-06T19:36:59Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
If they had kept going with the 386, 486, "586" nomenclature... at what number would we be at now?
(DIR) Post #AspBkWb99aRC9bJh56 by ParadeGrotesque@mastodon.sdf.org
2025-04-06T19:37:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@hisham_hm 986?
(DIR) Post #AspBkXgV7AJZWUpU48 by thomasmey@social.tchncs.de
2025-04-06T19:43:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ParadeGrotesque @hisham_hm what will happen after 986? 1086? Or switch to characters: a86 which would then also include x86
(DIR) Post #AspBkYKugudnXpjl3Y by hisham_hm@mastodon.social
2025-04-06T19:54:00Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@thomasmey @ParadeGrotesque omg, Intel releasing a processor literally called "x86" would be delightfully confusing.We'd need a copy of Windows 9.5 to run on that!
(DIR) Post #AspBkaFJahLpT38Jbk by hisham_hm@mastodon.social
2025-04-06T19:44:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Related question: since they named the FP unit 387 (which was then integrated into the 486, let's call it "487")... it they had called MMX "588", then SSE "689", and kept going... at what number would that be at now?tired: "This is a i7 15970 with AVX2, integrated Xe, GNA"wired: "This is a 2186 DX8 with built-in 2189, 218C and 218F units"
(DIR) Post #AspVn2hSlivvNWkVCi by stenpett@mstdn.games
2025-04-06T20:52:11Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@hisham_hm Pentium: 586Pentium II: 686Pentium III: 786Pentium 4: 886Core: 986Core 2: 10861st to 15th gen Core i: 1186-2586So, I guess we'd be at 802586, or something like that