Released in 1982, the 80286 was 3.6 times faster than the 8086 at the same frequency. It could manage up to 16 MB of memory, but the 286 was still a 16-bit processor. It was the first x86 equipped with a memory management unit (MMU), allowing it to manage virtual memory. Like the 8086, it did not have a floating-point unit (FPU), but could use a x87 co-processor chip (80287). Intel offered these processors at a maximum frequency of 12.5 MHz, whereas their competitors reached 25 MHz.
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Code name
N/A
Date released
1982
Architecture
16 bits
Data bus
16 bits
Address bus
24 bits
Maximum memory
16 MB
L1 cache
No
L2 cache
No
Clock frequency
6–12 MHz
FSB
same as clock frequency
FPU
80287
SIMD
No
Fabrication process
1,500 nm
Number of transistors
134,000
Power consumption
N/A
Voltage
5 V
Die surface area
49 mm²
Connector
68-pin
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
I might be wrong, but i resemble that the Pentium 166 (32bits adress bus and all) had support for 4Gb of memory. I remember IBM sold it's top line (at that time) with 64Mb support (even with SDR PC100/66 support). Correct me if i'm wrong please.
The core 2 does supply 1-4 cores - 2 cores per die, where one might be disabled, and one or two dies on a socket. It's no less right to call a core2duo a cpu with 1-4 cores, than it is to put the pentium d on the same page as a single core prescot, as it's the very same principle.
Arkzgreat article with only a few slight errors (like saying the core2duo has 1-4 cores http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coree ... i don't think there's a 1 cored version lol)Looking forward to the AMD article.
Thanks for the heads-up! I tweaked that passage to better represent the Core 2 architecture's available configurations!
vosesterOk it is not under the same branding but it is part of the same microarchitecture Exactly. The article says:
ArticleThere are many versions of the architecture, resulting in configurations with a different number of cores
There is no mention of the branding, so there is no actual error there, just misinterpretation.
Arkzgreat article with only a few slight errors (like saying the core2duo has 1-4 cores... i don't think there's a 1 cored version lol)Looking forward to the AMD article.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116039
Yes, it isn't called a "Core 2 Duo," but it uses the Core architecture and only has a single core enabled.
But I will have to say, there aren't any 3 core models...
Good to hear you're not only doing an AMD article, but an ATI one as well (in response to the Nvidia article you did earlier, assuming). A sign of class from the new Tom's is a welcome one.
I wish they would get rid of those stupid SNAP Linkbubless and Inteltex misguiding links. Who ever invented those stupid annoying double lined text popups should have been burned at the stake