cyrix

I wonder in an alternate timeline, if Cyrix had worked with Carmack to get a patch for Cyrix, how the outcomes would have changed.

The early processor years were tumultuous as on the battleground the 486 clones of Cyrix and TI lost.

For extra credit how do you find-out and are you sure your approach works on Cyrix and Via too?

Involved underclocking a Cyrix Cx something on some unknown brand MB that supported non-standard clock multipliers.

This number of cores remarks started to remind me of the gigahertz race between Intel, Amd and Cyrix back in the days.

Didn't Cyrix cpus have some fpga in them, that would be dynamically assigned to any repetitive code that the cpu was busy doing?

I remember I had a Cyrix 6x86 in one of my first computers that ran windows 95.

AMD even picked up Cyrix leftovers from National Semi (Geode).

I'll always have a fond spot in my heart for my cheap Cyrix CPU.

> For extra credit how do you find-out and are you sure your approach works on Cyrix and Via too?

AMD and Cyrix vs intel debates were common.

Keep in mind that this article mentions p4 and athlon, so Intel would have also have had to care about Cyrix and Transmeta as well, which were different as well.

Me too, and I recall the Cyrix "Pentium-like" chips were cheaper and faster than Intel's actual Pentium chips!

One small nit: “it cannot have an FPU added (that is not the case with Cyrix 486S…)” This is mostly true but the 486SX can be paired with a math coprocessor via the 487SX, but the 487SX is actually a full CPU that disables the SX, not a full FPU!

Cyrix chips get too much hate because of Quake being optimized specifically for the Pentium and its FPU.

Cyrix doesn't seem like a great example, as it mostly competed with Intel on its budget chips, if Wikipedia is correct.

Cyrix doesn't exist anymore, and VIA doesn't appear to have any current-generation hardware.