Xref: utzoo comp.os.msdos.programmer:2715 comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:5322 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cica!bronze!copper!rschmidt From: rschmidt@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (roy schmidt) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer,comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc Subject: Re: 386 and EGA-card Message-ID: <1991Jan7.230634.6432@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> Date: 7 Jan 91 23:06:34 GMT References: <1991Jan7.165104.25541@santra.uucp> Sender: news@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (USENET News System) Organization: Indiana University, Bloomington Lines: 27 In article <1991Jan7.165104.25541@santra.uucp> c37189h@saha.hut.fi (Harri "Haba" Suomalainen) writes: >sverrehu@ifi.uio.no (Sverre H Huseby) writes: >>I have tried clearing the EGA graphics screen (mode 10h) ((16 and 32-bit code expunged)) >>The 386-routine takes almost the same amount of time as >>does the 8086-routine. > >If it were 32 bit memory 386 would be a lot faster. However, I doubt >you haveing a 32 bit EGA. Instead your EGA is 8 or 16 bit. As accessing >memory on EGA board is the speed limiting factor there shouldn't be big >differences in speed if both EGAs are the same type. (Of cource, higher >clock speed with 386 speeds up things unless you gotta use waitstates >for the EGA). > This is generally the case with 386 machines, aws they are often built on an AT bus. The 8- and 16-bit slots are on an 8 MHz bus, regardless of processor speed, while the 32-bit RAM is on a faster bus to yield zero wait-states for the RAM. So it is likely that your EGA card is on a two-wait-state bus, and the only difference in execution speed is in the processor handling instructions in extended registers. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Roy Schmidt | #include Indiana University | /* They are _my_ thoughts, and you can't Graduate School of Business | have them, so there! */