regardless, and be sure I am no expert on semiconductor manufacturing, I'd be surprised to find out that all 8088's were CMOS after a certain date. The 80c88's were used mostly in small laptops, no? (small being anything smaller then that Zenith big honker, w/the shocking blue display. It used a *real* 8088 IINM). A CMOS version would be slower and more prone to damage from static electricity. And it would require less power. Off the top of my head I can't think of any desktops that used them, but I may have actually ran into 1 or 2 in my travels. ?But I am glad you managed to answer your own question Jimbo :) --- On Thu, 2/12/09, Jim Leonard <trixter at oldskool.org> wrote: From: Jim Leonard <trixter at oldskool.org> Subject: Re: 8088 vs. 80c88 To: General at mail.mobygames.com, "On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> Date: Thursday, February 12, 2009, 2:49 PM Jim Leonard wrote: It turns out my information is bad.? The bug only asserts itself when an interrupt occurs during the REP.? Buggy CPUs don't continue; later ones do.? So to fix my detection code, I will increase the count in cx to something much longer, probably f000. -- Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org)? ? ? ? ? ? http://www.oldskool.org/ Help our electronic games project:? ? ? ? ???http://www.mobygames.com/ Or check out some trippy MindCandy at? ???http://www.mindcandydvd.com/ A child borne of the home computer wars: http://trixter.wordpress.com/