🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <38299@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> sl197009@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Chima Echeruo) writes:
$I have read many "experts" saying that the 286 is far slower than a 386.
$I have a 20Mhz 286 and I am yet to find a DOS computer in my college that
$performs faster than the 286 running DOS.

   At the same clock speed, a 286 is slightly faster than a 386 (at least
when running DOS software); however, the fact that 386s are available that
run at significantly higher clock speeds than the current fastest 286 means
that you can buy a 386 system that will beat the performance of even the
best 286 machine.

$I have read in Byte that there are going to be versions of the 286 at 25 Mhz.
$Is this true?

   Yes ... Harris, who has been producing 20 MHz 286s for a while now, has
just started making 25 MHz parts, and AMD plans to follow suit.  Intel, who
is trying to kill the 286 since other companies are also making it, is not
likely to up the speed on their part.  Instead, they are concentrating on
the 386SX to try to take over the current 286 market, and also the 386DX
and 486 for the high-performance market.

$If it is, won't a 25Mhz 286 outperform an equivalent 386 while in real mode?

   A qualified yes.  There will be exceptions, such as PKZIP, which sense
the presence of a 386 and utilize its instructions to achieve a significant
performance improvement.  However, these exceptions are rare.

$I do not think that the 286 is dead, maybe it is not the state-of-the-art in
$computer technology but it provides a very *fast* system for the average
$computer user. If the SX does not go past 16Mhz, I do not see the benefit for
$upgrading to a 386sx.

   It depends on what you want to do.  There is some software that is written
specifically for the 386 family; if you want to run this software (such as
OS/2 version 2 when it arrives, and many products which have been on the
market for a while now), you have no choice.  Also, don't forget that Intel
is expected to release a 20 MHz 386SX soon.

$When the 586 is ready for shipping by Intel, we will hear again how the 386
$is brain-damaged and not able to run the lastest sofware that is emerging.

   It depends on what features they put into it.  Two years ago, you might
have foretold the end of the 386 based on the fact that the 486 would be
coming out in a year or so ... but as it turned out, the 486 offers no
new operating modes.  In fact, the 486 can be viewed as a fast 386+387
combination with a cache.  It poses no threat to the 386 in terms of
operating modes, memory addressing capabilities, etc ... only in terms
of raw speed.

$When MicroSoft came out with OS/2, PC/XT owners were advised to can their
$machines and lay down the cash for a 286. After three years not much has been

   In the same BYTE issue (March 1990) you mentioned, there is a short
article on DOS, Unix and OS/2 discussing such topics as why OS/2 hasn't
had the impact that it seemed it might have two years ago.  They mention
such factors as increasing RAM prices (and we all know one feature of OS/2
is the ability to utilize, and the requirement for, more memory), a
somewhat incompatible DOS Compatibility Box, and the delay in the release
of the Presentation Manager.
-- 
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."