anyone knows why IBM chose Intel's x86 instead of its own powerPC CPU chip when initially introducing the PC?
479416
So why did IBM chose the 8-bit 8088 (1979) version of the 8086 for the IBM 5150 PC (1981) when most of the alternatives were so much better? Apparently IBM's own engineers wanted to use the 68000, and it was used later in the forgotten IBM Instruments 9000 Laboratory Computer, but IBM already had rights to manufacture the 8086, in exchange for giving Intel the rights to its bubble memory designs. Apparently IBM was using 8086s in the IBM Displaywriter word processor.\n\nOther factors were the fact that the the 8-bit 8088 could use existing low cost 8085-type components, and allowed the computer to be based on a modified 8085 design. 68000 components were not widely available, though it could use 6800 components to an extent. After the failure and expense of the IBM 5100 (1974/5/6? - their first attempt at a peronal computer - discrete random logic CPU with no bus, built in BASIC and APL as the OS), cost was a large factor in the design of the PC.\n\nThe availability of CP/M-86 is also likely a factor, since CP/M was the operating system standard for the computer industry at the time. However Digital Research founder Gary Kildall was unhappy with the legal demands of IBM, so Microsoft, a programming language company, was hired instead to provide the operating system (initially known at varying times as QDOS, SCP-DOS, and finally 86-DOS, it was purchased by Microsoft from Seattle Computer Products and renamed MS-DOS).\n\nDigital Research did eventually produce CP/M 68K for the 68000 series, making the operating system choice less relevant than other factors.\n\nIntel bubble memory was on the market for a while, but faded away as better and cheaper memory technologies arrived.\nIBM used to make a cyrix chip, but via bought the technologya couple of years ago when IBM no longer was interested in producing them
1031426
Gateway makes processors? IBM has its own processor?\n\nAll processors most people are using are either made by AMD (if it is Athlon or Turion or Sempron) or Intel (if it is Pentium, Centrino, or Celeron). Anyways, if you do manage to take the little processor chip out, it will work on any other computer considering that the motherboard is new enough. \n\nAs for your monitor problem, if your processor is compatible with the motherboard, there is no reason why it should affect the monitor. In computers, dont worry about brands. For example, I can run a Sony Viao Pc with a Dell Monitor, a HP printer, a Toshiba Scanner, and Alienware speakers and everything will still work fine :)
70275
The Intel 4004 \n\nIntel 4004 - The Chip \n\nThe 4004 was the world's first universal microprocessor. In the late 1960s, many scientists had discussed the possibility of a computer on a chip, but nearly everyone felt that integrated circuit technology was not yet ready to support such a chip. Intel's Ted Hoff felt differently; he was the first person to recognize that the new silicon-gated MOS technology might make a single-chip CPU (central processing unit) possible. \n\nHoff and the Intel team developed such an architecture with just over 2,300 transistors in an area of only 3 by 4 millimetres. With its 4-bit CPU, command register, decoder, decoding control, control monitoring of machine commands and interim register, the 4004 was one heck of a little invention. Today's 64-bit microprocessors are still based on similar designs, and the microprocessor is still the most complex mass-produced product ever with more than 5.5 million transistors performing hundreds of millions of calculations each second - numbers that are sure to be outdated fast. \n\nThe Pioneer 10 spacecraft used the 4004 microprocessor. It was launched on March 2, 1972 and was the first spacecraft and microprocessor to enter the Asteroid Belt.
57637
I would tend to think that the hardware is more advanced than the software.  Hardware, of course, was around first with simple electrical circuits; however, over time, fabrication processes for CPUs has become more refined, allowing for more components per chip, smaller chip size and thickness, heat reduction, lower power consumption, etc.  Also, newer processors have several cores working in tandem on the same chip, which is the same as having multiple processors in one small package.\n\nAnother important note is that other pieces of hardware which run independently (and can be controlled by software drivers) are keyboards, scanners, monitors, network adapters, etc.\n\nSoftware, however, has been key in designing these new processors and other pieces of hardware, simulating them, designing board layout, etc.  One key point though, software cannot completely simulate an Input/Output device.  While there are design / emulation packages out there (even virtual PC software that allows one to simulate more advanced processors on lower end hardware), I have yet to see software completely replace the following *without* any hardware whatsoever: Keyboard, mouse, scanner, printer, monitor, CD/DVD drive, speakers, wireless data transfer, etc.\n\nI would have to say that hardware is more advanced.
246036
intel's CORE DUO\n\nAMD'S x2
1092115
Speaking from architectural point of view Pentium III and Pentium 4 are entirely different creatures.  Pentium III core is based on the Pentium Pro core that was introduced many years ago.  Pentium III is the evolution of that core with added features like SSE and etc.\n\nPentium 4 however was a completely different core based on the NetBurst architecture.  The architecture was designed to assist higher clock speed through its longer stages of execution.  It's perfect for multimedia applications that are repetitive and require a lot of data to be pushed out in a repetitive manner.  The downside to this is that, it is less efficient than Pentium III processors because of the length of the stages Pentium 4 does less work per clock than Pentium III.  So a Pentium 4 at 2.8 Ghz may only be able to perform at the level of a Pentium III at 2.0 Ghz.\n\nIn an interesting move by Intel, the latest cores, Core2 based, are a return to the Pentium III philosophy of doing more per clock and complete abandonment of Pentium 4 core.  Core Duo and the Core Technology based on the Pentium M core developed by Intel's Israel Research center brought the focus back to efficiency in thermal heat and also instruction per clock back into vogue.\n\nPentium 4 is on its way out.  Now the chic thing to do is package multiple processor cores in 1 die and have multicore processors.  (It offers absolutely no performance advantage if the software is not able to use the additional cores.)\n\nFor multimedia, Pentium 4 is an impressive platform.  For general usage, Pentium III provides a better balance of performance.  In either case, they are both on their way out.
1061007
The 8086 is a 16-bit microprocessor chip designed by Intel in 1978, which gave rise to the x86 architecture. The Intel 8088 (released shortly afterwards) was essentially the same chip, but with an external 8-bit data bus, allowing the use of cheap chipsets. That 8088 processor is notable as the processor used in the original IBM PC
611699
Well, prior to the solving of the conflict, we usually install MacOS on a Virtual Machine, so you actually run MacOS on top of Windows as a normal Window, and you can set it to FullScreen Mode, minimize it to get on with some work on your Windows, or even shut it down and have Windows running...\n\nRegarding the solving of the conflict of Intel & Mac, this only means that Intel shall produce processors for Mac PC's, and therefore there is a new competitor for PowerPC Processors, but this doesn't mean that MacOS will be supported on IBM-Standard Computers...\n\nIntel will produce processors that are competible with MacOS Architect to support its applications, and won't simply take the default IBM-Standard Processor and ship it as is for MacOS...\n\nSo, the only solution you have to run MacOS on an IBM-Standard computer, is to run it virtually on another Operating System (either Windows or Linux)...\n\nExamples of Virual Machine Applications:\nMicrosoft Virtual PC:\nhttp://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtual...\n\nPS: Microsoft has a version of Virtual PC for Mac PCs\nhttp://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtual...\n\nVMware Workstation:\nhttp://www.vmware.com/products/ws/...\n\nPS: VMware is available for Windows and Linux\n\nPPS: To run Virtual Machines, make sure you have a good processor and a lot of Memory (RAM)\n\nHope this answers your question...
61706
most likely that you have a computer with a Genuine Intel processor\n\nx86 refers to the intel 80286 processor family that is used in the PC. The other CPU manufacturer is AMD.\n\ni leave a table with cpu speed
639323
x32 = 32 bit processors, though I have never seen it denoted that way it stand to reason given your other listings there.  It could also refer to 32-bit programs but again, I've never seen it denoted that way.\n\nx64 refers to either a 64-bit processor or the 64-bit version of Windows which is called surprise, surprise Windows x64.\n\nx86 refers to an x86 processor, the architecture if you will.  There are only two (consumer) types of architecture, PowerPC, used by Apple and x86 used by Intel and AMD.  Most new x86 processors are 64-bit but they are not usually called x64 processors though you will see some programs denoted as x64 versions which means it will only run on a 64-bit processor.  32-bit programs will run on a 64-bit processor but programs that have any 16-bit component will not run under a 64-bit environment.  In order to take advantage of the 64-bit nature of a processor you must also have a 64-bit operating system installed, like Windows x64, as above.
246949
Assuming you could find a P4 running at that speed (the fastest P4 Intel released was 3.8 Ghz based on a Prescott core, with the next fastest being a 3.73 Ghz P4 Extreme Edition), the processor would be, in absolute terms, faster than that Pentium M, but it would be consuming radically more power to provide that computing capability.   Pentium M is much more power efficient than Pentium 4, as measured on a "performance per watt" basis, the new standard Intel is using for designing microprocessors.  Because of this new focus on performance based on power consumption, Intel is dropping the Pentium 4 core from future processor development, and all new Intel CPUs will be based on Pentium M technology.
1139636
There isn't a difference. It's just branding.\n\nThe technical nonbranded term is EM64T.\n\nOnly relavent when selecting a motherboard for a processor.\n\nAnd yes, Intel sells 64-bit proccessors, and was in fact one of the first to do so with their Xeon proccessors.
950575
According to the EpoX website, the list is here\nftp://ftp.epox.com/downloads/FAQ/CPU%20approval%20list-INTEL-Aug04.pdf\nAs cheap as new PCs are, it might be more cost effective to just get a newer machine.\nIt lookslike Yahoo can't wrap the url, so you may have to cut paste these two together.\nftp://ftp.epox.com/downloads/FAQ/CPU\n%20approval%20list-INTEL-Aug04.pdf
5599
It is not a speculation...Its been announced and its confirmed. Apparently, intel chips are more "cooler" then IBM's power pc.
738555
Yes, I have Intel Pentium 4 w/hyperthreading & software that lets you choose programs to exclusively use, and option to turn on at startup. I have had no problems.
539911
That's because most corps don't purchase motherboards, they purchase systems.  Therefore, which chipset that ends up getting used is entirely dependant on which one the OEM that they (the corps) are purchasing from use.  So most Dell's for instance will use the Intel chipsets, so any corp that uses Dell's will use Intel chipsets.  This isn't a conspiracy or a concious descision by corps, they really don't care (actually most don't even know).
891255
i have ibm, and it works great. It is very reliable but a little expensive. It is one of the most sturdest computer i have used.