Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!bu-cs!purdue!decwrl!decvax!tektronix!tekcrl!tekgvs!toma
From: toma@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM (Tom Almy)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: 386SX for PC/AT
Keywords: 386SX, AT
Message-ID: <4393@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM>
Date: 19 Dec 88 17:01:41 GMT
References: <1031@logico.UUCP> <1550@micomvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: toma@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM (Tom Almy)
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.
Lines: 36

In article <1550@micomvax.UUCP> ray@micomvax.UUCP (Ray Dunn) writes:
>The 386SX provides extra functionality over the 286, not extra performance.
>
>The 386SX is what the 80286 *should* have been, and allows you to run full
>blown protected UNIX etc, and, eventually, the 386 version of OS/2.
>
>Moral: Don't buy a 386SX machine to run DOS!

But you can still get make use of the extra functionality of the 386 with
DOS:

1.	For Microsoft Windows, Windows 386 is much better than 286 in its
	handling of DOS applications.

2.	Descview is somewhat better with a 386.

3.	If for some reason you have extended memory rather than expanded
	memory, QEMM or 386-TO-THE-MAX can be used to emulated expanded
	memory.  Also, extended memory ram-disks are much faster with a
	386 because the 386 can leave protected mode without resetting
	the processor.

4.	Assuming the 80387SX (?) chip is based on the 80387, the 80387
	is much faster than the 80287, and has increased functionality.
	This could make floating point intensive programs faster, even
	if the 80386SX is no faster than the 80286.

Also, there are some DOS applications that run in 386 protected mode.

It makes sense to me to upgrade to the 386SX, but new systems should all
be 80386 (and not 80386SX) based.


Tom Almy
toma@tekgvs.TEK.COM
Standard Disclaimers Apply