IDT WinChip
Posts: 237
 
Location: USA |
Has Wikipedia lied again? Not to mention a few other websites which list information about the UMC U5SD processor as having an FPU? Well unless none of my motherboard correctly support a UMC U5SD and are leaving the FPU disabled, this certainly isn't adding up. Testing several motherboards, with chipsets including UMC, Intel, SIS and Symphony, this processor does not apparently actually contain an FPU. I found a 486 Benchmarking video on Youtube, from a guy in Russia, which this processor came from, and I checked the numbers on his U5SD chip and it is not the same one I have, and I looked at the information displayed on his screen, and the software he ran also listed his as not having an FPU. Thoughts?
Another interesting thing I discovered is that the Cyrix cache utility for their SLC/DLC/Drx2 chips does indeed detect this chip as being a Cyrix processor and "enables cache mode" where as other processors, including Cyrix 586, says Cyrix cpu not found. Interesting as some software and Bios does detect the U5SD chip as a Cyrix DLC or a TI processor, while others list it as a UMC U5S processor, or simply UMC. Fluke or could there be some kind of hybrid Cyrix/Intel design contained in these UMC processors? No way to know for certain either way.
Certainly had no idea that the U5SD would actually lack an FPU, but that seems to be the case, unless there is some kind of utility that has to be ran ( like the Cyrix cache enable utility ) for the FPU on the U5SD chip to function.
|
UMC U5SD ... Not actually a DX class processor?
