Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!usc!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!samsung!uunet!sjsca4!poffen
From: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: EUREKA!  (Was Re: Performance degradation in 386 enhanced mode)
Message-ID: <1991Jan22.211751.10728@sj.ate.slb.com>
Date: 22 Jan 91 21:17:51 GMT
References: <4491@mindlink.UUCP> <1991Jan21.211522.18732@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>
Reply-To: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger)
Organization: Schlumberger Technologies, San Jose, CA.
Lines: 27

In article <1991Jan21.211522.18732@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> mikew@charm.LCS.MIT.EDU (Michael B. Williams) writes:
>In article <4491@mindlink.UUCP>, a752@mindlink.UUCP (Bruce Dunn) writes:
>|> 
>|>      I have the problem on a 16 MHz 386 (not a 386 SX).  I wonder if the
>|> problem is because my memory above 1 megabyte is not on the motherboard, but is
>|> on a memory card on the bus which can only be accessed at bus speed.  My
>|> hypothesis is that when run in standard mode, Windows runs mainly in the 1
>|> megabyte of easily accessible memory on the motherboard, but when I ask for
[...]
>Bruce, after months of enduring countless (and incorrect) explanations of
>multitaksing in 386 mode as the cause of this problem, I think that you may
>have finally found the REAL cause:  >>> AT-bus memory! <<<<
>
[...]

I have a 386dx/25 with 8M of memory on the motherboard. Outside of windows,
Norton SI says 25.8 CPU index and 11.1 disk index. In a DOS window I get
24.7 CPU and 9.8 DISK. It appears that on my system, there is not much
performance hit.

Now programs that do graphics in a DOS window ARE noticeably slower, but this
makes sense.

Russ Poffenberger               DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com
Schlumberger Technologies       UUCP:   {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen
1601 Technology Drive		CIS:	72401,276
San Jose, Ca. 95110             (408)437-5254