Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!samsung!usc!sdsu!crash!pnet01!jca
From: jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: 386 vs 386SX
Message-ID: <988@crash.cts.com>
Date: 27 Dec 89 02:16:02 GMT
Sender: root@crash.cts.com
Organization: People-Net [pnet01], El Cajon CA
Lines: 31

Vaprak@cup.portal.com (John C Foy) writes:
>It has come to pass that my ole 'part r us' 286 has finally shown its
>inadequacies (sp?) and I have decided to make the move to a 386 system.
>
>I am somewhat confused though regarding the 386 vs. 386SX systems.
>Will the SX run ALL software designed for a straight 386?  I do not wish 
>to get the SX and go through the hair pulling that I have done so far with
>my juked 286!  The only reason I consider the SX is because of money.  If
>the SX will not provide the same results (except speed) as a straight 386,
>then I will have to bite the bullet and go straight 386.  I wish to have
>the capabilities of OS/2, UNIX, Xenix, etc. as well as MSDOS.
>
>Vaprak@Cup.Portal.Com

You and I are in the same boat.  My understanding is that a 386SX is identical
to a 386 with respect to what will run on it, but you have certain limitations
that are put on it (i.e.: 16-bit data bus, 16 Mb of addressable memory (most
386SX motherboard use 286 chip sets which work just fine)).  But if you are
just looking for a 286 board with 386 compatability then the 386SX will suit
you just fine.
 
     // JCA

 /*
 **--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
 ** Flames  : /dev/null                     | My opinions are exactly that,
 ** ARPANET : crash!pnet01!jca@nosc.mil     | mine.  Bill Gates couldn't buy
 ** INTERNET: jca@pnet01.cts.com            | it, but he could rent it.  :)
 ** UUCP    : {nosc ucsd hplabs!hd-sdd}!crash!pnet01!jca
 **--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
 */