Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!apple!tahoe!jimi!reed.cs.unlv.edu!whitney
From: whitney@reed.cs.unlv.edu (Lee Whitney)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: Why buy a DX over an SX?
Message-ID: <1991Apr21.203004.9909@unlv.edu>
Date: 21 Apr 91 20:30:04 GMT
References: <14534@encore.Encore.COM> <1991Apr12.162615.13529@holos0.uucp>
Sender: news@unlv.edu (News User)
Reply-To: whitney@reed.cs.unlv.edu (Lee Whitney)
Organization: UNLV Computer Science and Electrical Engineering
Lines: 9

In article <1991Apr12.162615.13529@holos0.uucp>, lbr@holos0.uucp (Len Reed) writes:
) 
) So what?  You're running *all* 16-bit software and you want to know
) why having a a 32-bit data path doesn't buy you much?  Windows puts
) the machine into proctected mode, but it doesn't use 32 bit mode.
) 
Your statement is impratical and misleading.  First, the 386SX DOES have a        32 bit data path or else it would not be a 386!  It's bandwidth is only limited   across the bus, and since 90% of 386 buses are 16 bit (ISA), most DX systems would not realize a tremendous advantage over SX's when using 32-bit protected mode software.

A $200 cache may be worth a 25-30% performance increase, but the 5-10% increase of a DX over an SX with a 16 bit bus is probably not.