Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:52, 9 May 2013

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of Intel processors article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Electronics Mid‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Leave messages at the project talk pageElectronicsWikipedia:WikiProject ElectronicsTemplate:WikiProject Electronicselectronic Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Computing Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Technology This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of Intel processors article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months

Tip: #section links are case-sensitive on most browsers Links from this article with broken #section links : ], ], ], ], ] You can remove this template after fixing the problems | FAQ | Report a problem

80286

The 80286 is being given short shrift here. It was not just a faster 8086 or 80186! This was the CPU that made the 8 bit bus obsolete (there was no 80288) and introduced protected mode.

The i286 could run Windows 3.1 (in Standard mode) unlike the earlier 8086/8088/80186/80188. It shouldn't just be lumped in with those DOS real mode CPU's with no notations.

P4 -- a new generation? (G7?)

Wasn't the Pentium4 finally a leap into generation 7? ANyone care to put headings in, eg "486 generation" / "generation 4" / whatever the correct term is? -- Tarquin

Calling the Pentium 4 7th generation is a bit amusing considering it is inferior to the 'previous generation'. It was a redesigned core for the purposes of scaling high MHz, not speed. A Pentium III at 2.4GHz with 800MHz FSB would probably run rings around a P4EE. All creations for marketing, like how the Pentium Pro was sold under ~5 different names. Crusadeonilliteracy

List clutter fixed

The old list was pretty cluttered and hard to read (at least to me). I've formatted most of it as nested lists, which helps readability, but now we've got a pretty long page. Any ideas how to break this up? By year of production maybe? Or generations? -- Wapcaplet

80186

It should be noted here that despite everyone saying it was only available as embedded systems, there were still lots of desktop systems (like the siemens pc-d I have in my cellar). it was available with a 80187 fpu and a revolutionary bus system that allowed up to 127 extension cards.. if your case was big enough... and then later I got some 14mb hard drive... ah, those were the times... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.176.232.207 (talk) 19:11, September 10, 2006

"Built-in multitasking" ?

I removed this completely nonsensical statement. It was perhaps the intention that some reference be made to support for _virtual memory_, so it's fair to say "had built-in support for multitasking o/s's that require vm".

IXP?

Shouldn't the Intel IXP product line be listed?

Last 2 lists, need some more info on Years ?

hi, first time here. found it impossible to find info on a processor that did not have specific model number listed. would say adding 1 column with the year of release would help greatly. (have no idea how to add columns). will see about looking up data, seems like would not be able to find all at once.

- i was looking for the year of manufacture for:

Xeon Dual-Core X5260, took me more than an hour to find. seems to be 2009 (date at bottom): http://h18004.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/12476_div/12476_div.HTML

update, on link this page, would seem you already have that info, if buried/ after need it: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wolfdale-DP_(microprocessor)#Wolfdale-DP answer would seem to be: 2007-present for: 80573 Xeon 5200 Wolfdale-DP (i was looking for: x5260, xeon 5260, 52xx)

Omgitsmon (talk) 05:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

8031/8051: 1-bit architecture

There is a discussion underway at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Electronics#8031.2F8051:_1-bit_architecture.3F related to 1-bit architecture in MCS-51. Toddst1 (talk) 13:15, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Please calm down. Tagremover (talk) 13:20, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

That's a rather rude and aggressive reply to a neutrally worded notice of a relevant discussion on another page. Please be WP:CIVIL. --Guy Macon (talk)

For a third time, improve your tone. Accuse others to be rude and aggressive is not friendly. Please be WP:CIVIL. It was also mainly to Toddst1 comment on this article revert. Tagremover (talk) 14:25, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't take orders from people who refuse to even discuss reasonable requests. If you want people to use a different tone towards you, change your behavior. --Guy Macon (talk) 14:36, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Reasonless revert

Actually you gave no reason, that seems dubious / disputed. Please discuss on project talk page. Tagremover (talk) 14:09, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

He gave a reason. "(Reverted to revision 554138447 by Guy Macon: remove dubious / disputed edit per project talk page." Please don't say things that are not true. --Guy Macon (talk) 14:39, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I stated the reason in the edit summary and left a neutrally worded message pointing to the discussion above. Miscounting the number of reverts is not constructive. It was a singular action. Your malevolent characterizations of others' actions is now disruptive. Toddst1 (talk) 14:55, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• List-Class electronic articles
• Mid-importance electronic articles
• WikiProject Electronics articles
• List-Class Computing articles
• Mid-importance Computing articles
• All Computing articles
• List-Class Technology articles
• WikiProject Technology articles