Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!trwind!venice!press
From: press@venice.SEDD.TRW.COM (Barry Press)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: EUREKA!  (Was Re: Performance degradation in 386 enhanced mode)
Message-ID: <974@venice.SEDD.TRW.COM>
Date: 23 Jan 91 17:38:13 GMT
References: <4491@mindlink.UUCP> <1991Jan21.211522.18732@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <1991Jan22.211751.10728@sj.ate.slb.com>
Reply-To: press@venice.sedd.trw.com (Barry Press)
Organization: TRW Systems Engineering & Development Division, Redondo Beach, CA
Lines: 15

In article <1991Jan22.211751.10728@sj.ate.slb.com> poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger) writes:
>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.

Some rigor might be missing from all this -- I noticed last night that on a
486/25 which usually reports about 54 Norton SI, I got 304 (!!) in a DOS window.
Not at all clear what the interactions between Norton and the Windows 
pre-emptive DOS scheduler are, for instance, and so I'd be real careful trying
to interpret what people are seeing trying to benchmark running DOS under 
Windows.

-- 
Barry Press                                 Internet: press@venice.sedd.trw.com