Talk:NEC V20

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Computer hardware task force.

I have a computer (Multiterm Portable Office) of which Norton System Information states has a Nec V20 CPU running at 16MHz, while the article states the maximum speed is 12MHz. I'll change it to 16, but I don't know the specified maximum clock speed of the CPU. Rderijcke 23:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other emulators.[edit]

Sydex 22NICE is another emulator which can access the 8080 functions of the V20 and V30. 22NICE also emulates an 8080 on other x86 CPUs but at a substantial speed penalty on contemporary 1980's and early 1990's systems. Bizzybody (talk) 07:03, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Division?[edit]

I upgraded my 8088 to a V-20 and it was faster. If I remember correctly, the V-20 had a hardware divide whereas the 8088 did not. Is that correct? If so, it can go in the article. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 22:18, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Faster than IBM 8088[edit]

My first real '88/'86 based PC was an IBM 5051 clone with a V20 in it. It was a full 0.33 MHz faster than IBM's 4.77 MHz 8088. I even ran Windows 2.0 on it.2A00:23C7:5998:C701:65C0:A8DD:B61:F70D (talk)

8087 Compatibility[edit]

"The V20 was reported to have been compatible with the Intel 8087 floating-point unit (FPU) coprocessor.[6]"

I can confirm that seems to be the case, back in the early '90s my first PC had a 10MHz (I think) V20 and an 8087 co-processor and the two appeared to function properly. SlySven (talk) 11:33, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of citation needed template[edit]

This article (except perhaps the variants section) seems to have adequate inline citations. If anything, maybe it should be moved to a section template in the variants section? The tag has been there for almost 10 years, and it seems better-cited than many other articles I've seen. I might be bold and go ahead and remove it -- if you disagree, we can continue the discussion here. MrAureliusR_Talk! 00:09, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]