>> > The 4004 was once rumored to have been named that because it had the >> > equivalent of 4004 transistors. >> > THAT is what probably gave rise to the 68000 silliness. >> > It's MUCH more impressive what was done with only 486! >> Shoudn't that read "80486"? >only if we stick with intel! >That's what was so impressive about the Cyrix 486SLC, was that it DIDN'T >have the other 80,000! 'course it always seemed more like a fast 80386 to >me. >And the K6 does a really nice job with 6144! >and how about the Z80, V20, etc.?

Hi What are you guys talking about. The K6 has millions of transistors, as does the 486.