Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!m.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.iastate.edu!pv01a0.vincent.iastate.edu!goldberg
From: goldberg@iastate.edu (Goldberg Adam Michael)
Subject: Re: How much for a 487SX?!!
Message-ID: <goldberg.673147173@pv01a0.vincent.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
References: <13471.281da4bf@ecs.umass.edu> <1991May1.131401.10245@cbnewsh.att.com> <1991May1.214432.15762@cmcl2.nyu.edu> <1991May1.233459.1062@eng.umd.edu>
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 2 May 1991 01:19:33 GMT
Lines: 36

In <1991May1.233459.1062@eng.umd.edu> crouse@eng.umd.edu (Gil Crouse) writes:
>In article <1991May1.214432.15762@cmcl2.nyu.edu> tester@cmcl2.nyu.edu (L Testerville) writes:
>>Maybe it's just me, but it seems like Intel is trying to pull a MAJOR
>>marketing scam on us.  According to Infoworld, Intel will sell the 486SX-20
>>to OEMs for $258.  Sounds good compared to AMD selling the AMD386DX-40
>>for $390.  But, there's a catch.  If you ever want to get a math
>>coprocessor (487SX), you need to shell out an ADDITIONAL _$799_ (which
>>is a technologically brain-damaged approach: the 487SX actually "takes
>>over as [both] the CPU and the math coprocessor").  Now the 486-25
>>supposedly goes for $588, but for the lame user who opts for a 486SX-20;
>>he/she will have to shell out a total of $1057 (OEM costs, mind you) for
>>what amounts to a 486-_20_!  Mind-boggling.  Maybe Intel figures nobody
>>will catch on to this plot?

>The big assumption your making is that every one will want to get the
>487SX at some point.  The math coprocessor market is a fraction of the
>size of the market for CPUs.  For business application the coprocessor
>really doesn't offer much improvement in speed.  Most (or at least
>many) PC users are perfectly happy with a fast CPU and no coprocessor.
>If that is the case, buying the 486SX saves the buyer $330.

Of course, the whole 486SX thing is a big scam for Intel.  The difference
between a 486SX & DX?  The SX has the internal math processor (all 486DXs
have the math co-processor built-in) disabled.  So the 487SX is actually
a 486DX in disguise.  What it amounts to is Intel trying to scam us into
believing that we're better off getting a 486SX for the same prices as
an AMD 386-40.  

Personally I'd rather buy an inferior chip from AMD than a better one from
Intel.  Increased competition -> lower prices -> more competition.

Just say No (to Intel).

Adam

-- 
