Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday April 23 2020, @12:33PM   Printer-friendly
from the Sorry-about-that-boss! dept.

Worst CPUs:

Today, we've decided to revisit some of the worst CPUs ever built. To make it on to this list, a CPU needed to be fundamentally broken, as opposed to simply being poorly positioned or slower than expected. The annals of history are already stuffed with mediocre products that didn't quite meet expectations but weren't truly bad.

Note: Plenty of people will bring up the Pentium FDIV bug here, but the reason we didn't include it is simple: Despite being an enormous marketing failure for Intel and a huge expense, the actual bug was tiny. It impacted no one who wasn't already doing scientific computing and the scale and scope of the problem in technical terms was never estimated to be much of anything. The incident is recalled today more for the disastrous way Intel handled it than for any overarching problem in the Pentium micro-architecture.

We also include a few dishonourable mentions. These chips may not be the worst of the worst, but they ran into serious problems or failed to address key market segments. With that, here's our list of the worst CPUs ever made.

  1. Intel Itanium
  2. Intel Pentium 4 (Prescott)
  3. AMD Bulldozer
  4. Cyrix 6×86
  5. Cyrix MediaGX
  6. Texas Instruments TMS9900

Which CPUs make up your list of Worst CPUs Ever Made?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by RS3 on Friday April 24 2020, @03:08PM

    by RS3 (6367) on Friday April 24 2020, @03:08PM (#986496)

    Great point. And, especially in those days, chip yields (usable ICs) were low, and the bigger the die, statistically the fewer good ones you'll get. And they didn't have the PGA and 4-sided PLCC and BGA packages that they developed for the LSI in the 80s. So making bigger chips would have cost much more and nobody would have bought.

    Which brings up the memory that there were some multi-package microprocessors, and I forget which ones did that, but it was 2 or 3 chips, and they were not popular.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2