What is the significance of 33.33333333

[BCinSC]

From vinyl LPs to computer clock generators - why this value? And why does it continue in subsequent iterations: 33MHz, 66, 100, 133, 166, 200, 233, 266, 300, 333, 366, 400....1066, etc?

 

[Tostada]

It's just because Intel is evil.

Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a Coppermine SL3XL; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six point six repeating megahertz. --Revelation 13:18

 

[Chaotic42]

My guess is that it's a simple number. Most numbers that show up everywhere are small numbers. It's a multiple of 1/3, which is a pretty common fraction. Just a guess.

 

[BCinSC]

If original 8086 was 4.77MHz (where the hell did that come from?) and the 286 was 6, 8, 12, and 16MHz, was it the evil 386 that has damned us?

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: BCinSC
If original 8086 was 4.77MHz (where the hell did that come from?) and the 286 was 6, 8, 12, and 16MHz, was it the evil 386 that has damned us?

A lot of great things came out of the 386.

I always thought it was funny that we would see 266mhz, 366mhz, 466mhz, 566mhz, 667mhz.

 

[MichaelZ]

i want a P3 666mhz. damn them for rounding up for that particular model

 

[BCinSC]

I've got a Dual 333 - does that mean that machine is evil?

 

[BCinSC]

So the question remains - how did 3 become the magic number?

 

[JKing76]

Well, 1 is the loneliest number, and 2 can be as bad as 1 (it's the loneliest number since the number 1), so 3 it was.

 

[TheGrandHooHa]

Originally posted by: JKing76
Well, 1 is the loneliest number, and 2 can be as bad as 1 (it's the loneliest number since the number 1), so 3 it was.

You, sir, owe me a new soda and a new keyboard. Good show!

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: JKing76
Well, 1 is the loneliest number, and 2 can be as bad as 1 (it's the loneliest number since the number 1), so 3 it was.

ROFL!!!

 

[So]

33.333 Mhz has to do with the fiac that 1/3 = .3333

The 4.77 mhz thing for the 8086, iirc, had to do with convenient dividers for serial bus speed (to send whole bytes at regular clock intervals). At least that's why the 8088 microcontroller that I used in lab last sememster was that speed.

 

[natto fire]

Originally posted by: JKing76
Well, 1 is the loneliest number, and 2 can be as bad as 1 (it's the loneliest number since the number 1), so 3 it was.

LOL. Damn funny post. Makes me want to watch Magnolia.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: So
33.333 Mhz has to do with the fiac that 1/3 = .3333

My best guess would be that, for whatever reason, the 386 used a 100Mhz clock divided by 3 -- thus, 33.333...Mhz. The 486 went 25/50/75/100, then they went back to 33s with the Pentium, then back to 50s with the P2...

I dunno. They just can't make up their minds over there.

 

[JetBlack69]

4.77 came from the NTSC Color Subcarrier Frequency, 3.579545 MHz. I forget why, but multiply that by 4/3 and you get 4.77 Mhz.

 

[DotheDamnTHing]

Originally posted by: Captain_Howdy

Originally posted by: JKing76
Well, 1 is the loneliest number, and 2 can be as bad as 1 (it's the loneliest number since the number 1), so 3 it was.

LOL. Damn funny post. Makes me want to watch Magnolia.

what was the song called...i forgot

 

[BCinSC]

The song is "One" by Three-Dog Night.Listen on Amazon

3 is a Magic Number - Schoolhouse Rock

 

[merlocka]

Originally posted by: JKing76
Well, 1 is the loneliest number, and 2 can be as bad as 1 (it's the loneliest number since the number 1), so 3 it was.

teh funnay has been found

 

[PizzaDude]

it is the decimal representation of 1/3

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: BCinSC
I've got a Dual 333 - does that mean that machine is evil?

It would be if 666 had any meaning.

 

[BCinSC]

But no one has really answered WHY?

 

[KoolAidKid]

Perhaps because the fastest FSB Intel could get out of the 486 was 33 MHz? Everything beyond the 486-33 used multipliers AFAIK. Although I have a vague memory of there being a version of the 486-50 that had a 50 MHz FSB (i.e., not 25x2).

 

[BCinSC]

Yes, there was a full 50MHz non-DX2 486. I had one and was the fastest system of it's time, though occasionally unstable (but was that just Windows 3.1?)

However, AMD had both a 386/40 and a 486/40

 

[Lazy8s]

when in doubt blame it on Microsoft

 

[BCinSC]

Hey - fair is fair. There have been MANY times Micro$loth has been very much to blame.