586 and 686 : what's the difference?

[Hullboy]

Hi

I'm a newish slackware user who wants to have a go at recompiling the kernel. I started looking into it and realised that I couldn't reliably answer one of the first questions I needed to know:

Is your CPU a 486, 586 or 686?

I have an AMD Athlon (Thunderbird) 750MHz cpu.

Can anyone:

1. Tell me what architecture this cpu has?

2. Explain or point me to a resource to let me know what this all means.

I searched the AMD site but to my surprise couldn't turn anything up. Same on google.

I think the scale of my ignorance prevents me finding anything!

Thanks in advance for anyone who teaches me some stuff..........

 

[Jman13]

I do believe that if we still went by the numbering scheme that was implemented in the 80s and early 90s, the Athlon processor would be considered a 786. Thus the K7 original name. The Pentium line of processors is harder. The PPro and PII are definately 686s, but then the P3 is just an extension, so I guess the P4 would be the first Intel '786.'

AMD's Hammer line of processors will be their K8 or 886 equivalents, but since no one goes by that numbering, the point is moot and kind of hard to distinguish.

After 686 architecture, no one even referred to their processors on the x86 naming convention, so it's tough. Pick 686 if that's the highest the choice will go, though.

 

[RobsTV]

They could have run out of numbers fairly fast if they stuck with the x86 system
686 CPU's were normally Cyrix chips.

Each AMD change below added new internal CPU features or package changes. Not for increase in speed alone.
AMD went from 586 to K6-x.
So the first K6 "could have been" their 686. (Intel original Pentium)
Followed by K6-2 with more cache (786). (Intel Celeron)
Then K6-III with still more cache (886). (Intel PII)
Then original Slot A Athlon or K7 needs an x86 number. (986) (Intel PIII)
Add to that the next generation Athlon, Socket A T-Bird for another x86. (1086)
Then the Duron line would need an x86 designation. (1186) (Intel PIII)
And the current favorite AMD, the XP+, would still raise the bar on x86 designation. (1286) (Intel P4).

So you see why they dropped x86 designations.

 

[eplebnista]

Here is a link to a processor info site.

hth,
eplebnista

 

[SexyK]

<< They could have run out of numbers fairly fast if they stuck with the x86 system
686 CPU's were normally Cyrix chips.

Each AMD change below added new internal CPU features or package changes. Not for increase in speed alone.
AMD went from 586 to K6-x.
So the first K6 "could have been" their 686. (Intel original Pentium)
Followed by K6-2 with more cache (786). (Intel Celeron)
Then K6-III with still more cache (886). (Intel PII)
Then original Slot A Athlon or K7 needs an x86 number. (986) (Intel PIII)
Add to that the next generation Athlon, Socket A T-Bird for another x86. (1086)
Then the Duron line would need an x86 designation. (1186) (Intel PIII)
And the current favorite AMD, the XP+, would still raise the bar on x86 designation. (1286) (Intel P4).

So you see why they dropped x86 designations. >>



I don't know if that's exactly acurate. The PPro, Pentium 2, celeron, and Pentium 3 are all really "686" chips. The K-6's are just different variations on a 686 core also. K7 was the first 786, and everything up through Athlon XP are still 786. P4's, northwood and willy are both intels "786". Each revision doesnt necessarily change the whole arcitechture of the chip, which is what the number scheme refered to back in the day.

Kramer

 

[Hullboy]

Thanks to all of you for the input, it's truely appreciated!

I will be going for the 686 option, as that is the highest available at the prompt.

I'll let you know how the compile goes by replying back here.

I hope it goes well, if not, check out the OS page for my pleas for help!

have an easy day...................

 

[htmlmasterdave]

It's a 686, anything above Pentium MMX is