Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!qucis!korsmana
From: korsmana@qucis.queensu.CA (Anthony Korsman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: 486/25/ISA vs. 386/33/EISA ?
Keywords: 486, 386, ISA, EISA
Message-ID: <2619@qusuntrh.queensu.CA>
Date: 5 Jun 91 16:42:24 GMT
References: <6306@borabora.omni.com> <1991May30.225841.7561@nlm.nih.gov>
Distribution: na
Organization: Queen's University, Kingston
Lines: 30

Hi,

The choice between the two is dependent on the type of work you will
be doing with the machine:

	If you are planing on using it for floating point and memory intensive
work then the choice would be the 486/25/ISA.  

	But, if your work is more I/O intensive or does not use the
FPU(floating point unit) then the 386/33/EISA is by far 
the better choice.  There are several manufactures out there that
make disk cache/controller boards for the EISA which will justify the 
EISA bus on its own.  I know of at least one TIGA graphics board 
for the EISA(bus bandwidth is very important when doing graphics).  I'm
sure there are more.  
	There is almost an order of magnitude difference in
the bandwidth between the ISA(AT bus) and EISA buses, not to mention all
the other benefits(eg bus mastering) of the EISA.  The EISA bus is actually
even fast than the MicroChannel if the was ever a consideration.
	As well, if you pick a mother board that has a separate CPU module then you
will be able to upgrade in the future to a faster CPU, if the FPU is needed.

	As for your question on Windows font manager.  I very much doubt that the
FPU would be of any use, but I could be wrong. -:)

Just my opinion. 

Anthony Korsman
Queen's University
Kingston, Ontario, Canada