Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 23 Oct 2000 02:23:01 +0100 (BST) | From | James Sutherland <> | Subject | re: K6-2+ name (was Re: AMD CPU misdetection?) |
| |
On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 davej@suse.de wrote:
> In the words of Barry K. Nathan : > > > > Why they didn't call it K6-4 is anyones guess. > > I read somewhere (I don't have a URL handy, sorry) that the reason AMD > > went with K6-2+ is that, apparently, the K6-2 name is well-known, and > > they wanted to build on that... > > Sounds like a marketing thing. > Not really an excuse imo. The "Oh, K6-4. I must upgrade" brigade would've > justified the name for more than confusing people. At least K6-2+ > is mostly used in laptops from what I've seen, so the confusion is > limited. > > Maybe there just wasn't enough architectural difference between the > K6-3 & the K6-2+ to justify calling it the K6-4. AFAIR, the powersaving > speed changing is the only thing thats changed. > > I'm buying a K6-2+ laptop tomorrow, so I guess I'll find out more then :)
ISTR the name is because it is derived more from the K6-II than the K6-3? The -3 was better on performance, but they wanted a more economical chip for laptop/embedded use, so they reverted to the K6-II core?
James.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |