🚀 go-pugleaf

tdbear@dvorak.amd.com (Thomas D. Barrett) writes:

>In article <4566.73.uupcb@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us> victor.volkman@hal9k.ann-arbor.mi.us (Victor Volkman)  writes:
>>Can anyone give me a coherent answer as to which would be faster and
>>why?  I have NO interest in any math coprocessors.

>Since you are not interested in the COP (for others... the 387/40 runs
>under $100 and the OverDrive(tm) runs much over $100, but the
>OverDrive is obviously much faster.  You might be able to find a 487sx
>which would be cheaper than the OverDrive(tm))... the only advantage
>that I see is the local bus speed.  If done correctly (0ws) you would
>have a much faster video and memory interface.  Even if done
>incorrectly (1ws), you would have a system which was 5ns faster for
>each access.

I've actually found the 486 SX faster than the 386 DX of twice the Mhz.  They
are also cheaper.  Th higher the Mhz the better the components have to be, and
therefore more expensive.  You also have an integral 8 KB cache in the 486 SX
that adds to performance.

-- 
The Golden Gryphon 				gryphon@openage.COM
"Mad Scientists seeks mindless brawny assistants, good pay, quiet location."
"They're not ghosts,  they're metaphysically challenged." - Me
Openage - The Premier SCO UNIX integrator in the Washington D.C. area