Why were Pentium IIs made as slots? What was intel thinking??

>>62258975

because it was was still early days and the new processor cache tech was not on the main cpu chip - took up half that card and was fabbed seperately because: yields

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NXVH_V0CMs

looking back, I wonder if it was to proprietize the slot and prevent others from making processors that fit.
they couldn't trademark the 486 (and by extension a 586) and therefore used the name pentium. no one could make clones anymore. everyone thought the pentium pro would have been named hexium.

>>62259056
also looking back, they could've just made cache chips, kind of like the 387 co-processor chips. they had 256K, 512K, and 1M pentium pros. if they would separate the cache in the pentium 2, why not make it modular?

i actually would kinda like CPUs that slot in like GPUs

>>62258975
>L2 cache is great but fabbing it on the CPU die is hard and putting it on the motherboard is slow

>>62259320
when I said proprietize the slot, I at the time of the pentium and pentium MMX, there were tons of other processors that fit the super socket 7 slot (AMD K5, K6, cyrix6x86). once slot 1 and slot A appeared, they all disappeared.

>>62259320
>also looking back, they could've just made cache chips, kind of like the 387 co-processor chips
That's what they did originally.

File: a209_3.jpg (25KB, 578x288px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 578x288px

>>62259328
a pain for heatspreaders and airflow, wasteful in space and materials (PCB plastic, connectors)

at least hard drives on cards aren't so bad (aren't that hot)

I was glad when drive controllers migrated to mobos. it sucked having that disk controller card with all the bulky ribbon cables emanating from it. not as enthusiastic for integrated sound or graphics chips because their performance sucked, and still sucks compared to full-sized cards.

>>62259376
wasn't that SRAM cache though? as opposed to processor L2 or L3 cache I mean.

File: s-l1600.jpg (227KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 1600x1200px

i like when people but cpus on boards then slot those boards into bigger systems.

>>62259427
It was an L2 cache, in between the CPU and system RAM. It was just in replaceable chips on the motherboard and not much faster than RAM.

They wanted to move the L2 cache on die but it was too expensive to fab at the time, so they compromised, fabbed it separately and put it on the Slot card where it could enjoy faster interconnects.

It also allowed them to sell basically the same CPU with different L2 cache configurations, which the motherboard based L2 cache solution wouldn't allow because people could upgrade the cache themselves. So it really was the beginnings of the jews.

those were the good old days.. where else can you OC a celeron for 300% gains?

>>62259450
http://www.chassis-plans.com/single-board-computer-sbc-and-backplane-or-motherboard/

>>62259563
Yeah, and you could overclock just by flipping some dip switches on the motherboard.

>yfw you set your celeron from a 66mhz FSB to 133mhz