Path: utzoo!attcan!lsuc!maccs!cs4g6ag
From: cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Stephen M. Dunn)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: ALR PowerFlex 486 upgrade (was Re: Brain-dead 286 - summary)
Message-ID: <25FA8E7F.28177@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca>
Date: 11 Mar 90 17:44:30 GMT
References: <1793@crash.cts.com>
Reply-To: cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Stephen M. Dunn)
Organization: McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario
Lines: 27

In article <1793@crash.cts.com> jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) writes:
$sl197009@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Chima Echeruo) writes:
$>I have read in Byte that there are going to be versions of the 286 at 25 Mhz.
$>Is this true?
$I've heard rumors that either AMD or Harris is going to produce a 25 MHz 286. 

   Harris already has 25 MHz parts, and AMD supposedly will have theirs out
soon.

$That is the route I'm taking, I'm dumping my 16 MHz 286 for an ALR PowerFlex
$and plopping a 386SX board in it.  I don't need the full 32-bit capabilities
$of the 386 (yet), just something to run 386 software.

   This brings up a question for anyone out there who has a PowerFlex with
the 486 board (I know, not a very common configuration):  how well does it
perform as a 486 system?  I'm personally a little bit leery of a 16-bit
machine being given a brain transplant with a 32-bit processor.  I can see
switching from a 286 to a 386SX as being pretty easy to engineer, but I
have to wonder how good a job they did of designing in the capabilities
for the 486.  Obviously, the 486 board will contain main memory (how much?),
but how will the rest of the system perform?

-- 
Stephen M. Dunn                               cs4g6ag@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca
          <std_disclaimer.h> = "\nI'm only an undergraduate!!!\n";
****************************************************************************
    "So sorry, I never meant to break your heart ... but you broke mine."