Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen
From: davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: Comparing 486 to 386 Systems
Message-ID: <3669@sixhub.UUCP>
Date: 11 Apr 91 02:29:18 GMT
References: <1991Apr4.142742.20601@lonex.radc.af.mil> <1991Apr4.204923.29300@agate.berkeley.edu> <27865@neptune.inf.ethz.ch> <1991Apr6.045408.15395@agate.berkeley.edu>
Reply-To: davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen)
Organization: *IX Public Access UNIX, Schenectady NY
Lines: 14

In article <1991Apr6.045408.15395@agate.berkeley.edu> c60b-1eq@e260-1d.berkeley.edu (Noam Mendelson) writes:

| My comparison was of features, not speed.  The difference between the
| 386 and the 286 is vast.  The 386 is 32-bit while the 286 is 16-bit.
| The 386 can split itself into four concurrent 8086's, each with their
| own 1M memory space, thereby allowing true multitasking.  

May I commend to you rereading the section on the virtual 8086 mode. You
are reading into the manual something Intel didn't write into their chip.
-- 
bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen)
    sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX
    moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me