24 Jan
2013
24 Jan
'13
1:44 p.m.
On 1/24/13 3:29 PM, geneb wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2013, Ethan Dicks wrote:
I work for "the other" x86/amd64 processor design house.
"Dice" is the correct term.
Doc
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 3:36 PM, David Riley
<fraveydank at gmail.com>
wrote:
Dice? Do you mean "dies" maybe? On Jan 24, 2013, at 1:42 PM, Fred Cisin <cisin
at xenosoft.com> wrote:
Back in the day, I heard the FPU was "disconnected" with laser-drilled
holes on dice that failed FPU testing, then the package was labelled
to match. To be clear, a wafer was made up of dice that were intended
to be sold as 486DX chips but failed FPUs (and most likely enough ones
with good FPUs to cover customer demand) were pierced.
> debacle, there was software thatcould
> completely restore functionality.I think it was called above-board,
NOPE.
> which had hardware as well as software,but on many SX type systems it
> was just software Actually if I remember correctly it was the 486SX
> CPUs
> made by AMD
We are talking INTEL.
He may be talking about the AMD second-sourced 486SX, which may have
had a different method of disabling the FPU. My recollection is that
the 486SX was, in fact, the same die as the 486DX (FPU and all) with
a fuse blown that disabled the FPU.