Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!ists!yunexus!xrtll!silver
From: silver@xrtll.uucp (Hi Ho Silver)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: 386 vs 386SX
Message-ID: <1990Dec10.024523.21545@xrtll.uucp>
Date: 10 Dec 90 02:45:23 GMT
References: <34117@netnews.upenn.edu> <1990Dec5.211220.13194@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>
Reply-To: silver@xrtll.UUCP (Hi Ho Silver)
Distribution: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Organization: Not around here, pal!
Lines: 21

In article <1990Dec5.211220.13194@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> draper@buster.cps.msu.edu (Patrick J Draper) writes:
$In my experience, running MS-DOS an SX is equally fast as a full 386. I
$think that is because MS-DOS is a 16-bit system, and runs in 16 bit real
$mode of 386's. Therefore there is no speed advantage from the 32 bit
$bus. I may be wrong, and I'm sure someone will correct me if I am.

   You're just a little off.  The 386DX does its instruction fetches
32 bits at a time, whereas the 386SX (obviously) can't fetch more than
16 bits at a time.  This gives the DX somewhat higher performance for
the same clock rate on 16-bit software.

   Keep in mind, also, that there is some software that is 386-specific,
and the speed difference will be greater for that software than for
16-bit software; also, there are some programs that detect if you have a
386 installed and will transparently use it if so (PKZIP/PKUNZIP, for
example).
-- 
 __            __  _  | ...!nexus.yorku.edu!xrtll!silver |  always
(__  | | |  | |_  |_) >----------------------------------< searching
 __) | |_ \/  |__ | \ | if you don't like my posts, type |    for
_____________________/  find / -print|xargs cat|compress |   SNTF