Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!hsdndev!cmcl2!adm!lhc!usenet
From: usenet@nlm.nih.gov (usenet news poster)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: 486/25/ISA vs. 386/33/EISA ?
Summary: Coprocessor vs. Bus ?
Message-ID: <1991May30.225841.7561@nlm.nih.gov>
Date: 30 May 91 22:58:41 GMT
References: <6306@borabora.omni.com>
Reply-To: werner@bio.NLM.NIH.GOV (Craig Werner)
Distribution: usa
Organization: National Library of Medicine
Lines: 12


	A friend asked me the following question.
	He is about to buy either one of two systems, a 386/33 with an
EISA bus, or a 486/25 with a normal AT bus.
	The question arises as to which of two features is of more use in
the next year or two: the built-in coprocessor of the 486 or the wider
bus of EISA?
	Does font management under Windows work any better with a 
coprocessor?
	Is there any hardware that requires EISA yet? (as there are at
least three boards that require IBM's MicroChannel)
	Any predictions as to near term trends.