Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!samsung!uunet!microsoft!steveha
From: steveha@microsoft.UUCP (Steve Hastings)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: '386's SX's and DX's
Message-ID: <56069@microsoft.UUCP>
Date: 25 Jul 90 17:52:24 GMT
References: <31122@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> <1773@cs.rit.edu> <1990Jul22.234030.25727@utstat.uucp> <1776@cs.rit.edu>
Reply-To: steveha@microsoft.UUCP (Steve Hastings)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Microsoft International Products Group
Lines: 24

In article <1990Jul22.234030.25727@utstat.uucp> philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) writes:
>>
>>But isn't the 386sx restricted in the amount of memory it can address? If
>>that's the case, then would a 386sx be able to run OS/2 ver 2.0 ?

In article <1776@cs.rit.edu> jdu4855@cs.rit.edu (Unrue Jack D) writes:
>Yeah, I think you and I are saying the same thing.  SX's use a 16 bit bus, and
>OS/2 ver 2.0 inhabits a 32 bit address space, so the two don't go together.


The 386SX has a 16-bit bus, which means that to do things in 32 bits
requires two bus cycles.  You could therefore run OS/2 2.0, or any other
386-specific software, on a 386SX.  It will just be slower.


For the ultimate in slowness, consider this:  you can buy a pin-compatible
replacement for a 286 -- a small daughterboard with a 386SX and some glue
logic.  (It costs about $300.)  It will run at speeds up to 16 MHz, but of
course it will run slower if you want it to.  I have this mental image of
an original IBM AT, running at 6 MHz, with one of these 386SX conversions
installed, running OS/2 2.0 -- it boggles my mind to think about it.  :-)
-- 
Steve "I don't speak for Microsoft" Hastings    ===^=== :::::
uunet!microsoft!steveha  steveha@microsoft.uucp    ` \\==|