Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!think!ames!lll-tis!lll-lcc!pyramid!voder!kontron!cramer
From: cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: 8 Mhz AT clone vs. 10 Mhz AT clone
Message-ID: <1792@kontron.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 20-Aug-87 20:34:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: kontron.1792
Posted: Thu Aug 20 20:34:59 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 22-Aug-87 15:56:44 EDT
Organization: Kontron Electronics, Mt. View, CA
Lines: 14

I've been looking at AT clone ads, and I've noticed that there are number
of 10 Mhz AT clones, many of which are 1 wait state.  There are a number
of 8 Mhz AT clones as well, most of which are 0 wait state.  Since the
price difference is frequently on the order of $150-$200 between the two,
I wonder if I might be better off to buy a faster hard disk (<30 ms
access time instead of >30 ms) instead of getting a 10 Mhz 1 wait state
system.

Unfortunately, the Norton SI index is really a measure of processor
speed, not of total speed including disk.  Anyone have access to roughly
comparable AT clones, one at 8 Mhz, 0 wait, the other at 10 Mhz, 1 wait,
to give performance figures?

Clayton E. Cramer