Newsgroups: sci.electronics Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!boulder!boulder!rainer From: rainer@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Rainer Malzbender) Subject: Re: AT bus bandwidth Message-ID: <1991Mar23.071821.16665@colorado.edu> Keywords: AT bus Sender: news@colorado.edu (The Daily Planet) Nntp-Posting-Host: rhubarb.colorado.edu Organization: /usr/local/lib/rn/organization References: <1991Mar22.193427.6586@colorado.edu> <12104@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu> Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1991 07:18:21 GMT In article <12104@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu> ressler@galileo.ifa.hawaii.edu (Mike "IR" Ressler) writes: > >Does this mean I can replace the 16 MHz oscillator in my 386-33 (which is >presumably divided by 2 to get 8 MHZ) by a 20 or 24 MHz oscillator to get >faster performance without ill effect? What things might gag? I've always >been curious about this since I have separate oscillators for the CPU and >the bus. > Chances are lots of those cheap Taiwanese clone boards plugged into your 'puter will choke since they weren't designed to run that fast. Unfortunately many of the Intel chips used in PC's (8255, 8253) have a sh***y bus interface, requiring long minimum read/write pulses and lots of time between sequential accesses. I never run my bus faster than 10 Mhz. I haven't looked into this too much, since when I want speed I just get on the horn to the YMP :-) But, hey, try it and see. -- Rainer Malzbender, PhD "It's not the bullet that kills you, it's the hole." Dept. of Physics (303)492-6829 -Laurie Anderson U. of Colorado, Boulder rainer@boulder.colorado.edu 128.138.240.246