Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!think!rutgers!clyde!watmath!jsgray
From: jsgray@watmath.UUCP (Jan Gray)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.m68k,comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: 80386 Benchmark Data
Message-ID: <3428@watmath.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 19-Nov-86 17:14:57 EST
Article-I.D.: watmath.3428
Posted: Wed Nov 19 17:14:57 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 19-Nov-86 23:08:50 EST
References: <324@plx.UUCP> <404@intsc.UUCP>
Reply-To: jsgray@watmath.UUCP (Jan Gray)
Distribution: net
Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 14
Xref: mnetor comp.sys.m68k:23 comp.sys.intel:32

In article <404@intsc.UUCP> tomk@intsc.UUCP (Tom Kohrs) writes:
>> The 386 was SIGNIFICANTLY *SLOWER* than the '020 in LONG INTEGER MATH
>> while it was virtually *EQUAL* to the '020 in SHORT INTEGER MATH.
>What was the sofware environment?  As far as I know at this point Compaq
>is shipping the Compaq 386 only with MS-DOS.  This uses 16 bit compilers
>and 286 programming models. In other words it treats the 386 as a fast 8088
>with all arithmetic being done 16 bits at a time.  If the OS environment 
>was UNIX V.3 for the 386 then I would want to know more about what the 
>benchmarks are.

Who is selling UNIX V.3 for the 386?  Can you even buy a C compiler
which supports 32 bit mode?

Jan Gray   jsgray@watmath   University of Waterloo   519-885-5921