Date:	Fri, 16 Oct 1998 13:39:34 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id:	<199810161939.NAA10336@kewlaid.highfiber.com>
X-Sender:	raster AT highfiber DOT com
X-Mailer:	Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	opendos AT delorie DOT com
From:	raster AT highfiber DOT com (Charles Dye)
Subject:	Re: GEM GUI
Reply-To:	opendos AT delorie DOT com

>|I didn't realize that the 8088 and the 8086 were that much different.  What
>|kind of computers were the 8086's installed in?  Will an 8088 replace an
>|8088 in an XT or PC with any advantages?
>
>   The 8088 is inferior to the 8086.  The 8088 is 8-bit through and
>through whereas the 8086 is 16-bit internally but is 8-bit in its external
>communications with the bus, motherboard, and peripherals.  the 8086 was
>also clocked higher than the 8088 ever was, if I understand correctly.

Er, no.  Both were 16-bit processors; from a software standpoint they
are identical.  The 8088 had an 8-bit external bus -- it needed two
fetches to load a 16-bit register, so it was slower.  But anything that
will run on an 8086 will also run on an 8088.

raster AT highfiber DOT com

- Raw text -