Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!thyme!kaleb
From: kaleb@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov (Kaleb Keithley	)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: tell me more about the 386sx
Message-ID: <1990Nov20.154832.6813@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov>
Date: 20 Nov 90 15:48:32 GMT
References: <14368@sdcc6.ucsd.edu>
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
Lines: 23

In article <14368@sdcc6.ucsd.edu> mbharrin@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Matt Harrington) writes:
>written for it in a few years.  So, my question stands:
>will the 386sx run all software that a true 386 will?

Let's all sing the 386 song (sung to the tune of Revolution #9)

A 386, is a 386, is a 386, is a 386,....

According to the Intel reference manual, the SX is 100% compatible with
a DX (that's a 386SX and a 386 to the non-cognoscenti.)  An SX only has
a 24-bit address bus, so it'll only be able to address 16 Meg, compared
to a DX which'll address lots more.  Every SX based computer should run
any software that a DX can; if it doesn't, it's broken, take it back
and get your money back.  Just plan on the SX being slower than the DX.

I ran Unix Sys V3-386, OS/2, QEMM/Desqview 386, Window-386, and Windows 
3.0 (386 mode) on my SX before I upgraded it.  

-- 
Kaleb Keithley                      Jet Propulsion Labs
kaleb@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov

I don't watch Twin Peaks; I just come to work.