🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <C0npry.AKI@wimsey.bc.ca> bhenning@wimsey.bc.ca (Bill Henning) writes:
>In article <C0E0zB.DwG@inews.Intel.COM> rskinner@mipos2.intel.com (Rod Skinner) writes:
>>Another interesting article comparing the Intel486 SX processor and the
>>Cyrix SLC is in InfoWorld December 21 page 48 "Reviews/Product
>>Comparisons: 25-MHz 486 Notebooks".  InfoWorld seems to come to the
>>conclusion that the Intel486 SX processors are 35% to 40% FASTER than
>>the Cyrix parts.  They use several examples but the most powerful is two
>>machines from TI: TravelMate 4000 WinSX/25 and the TravelMate WinSLC.
>>Both weigh 6 pounds with battery.  Similarly configured machines yield
>>SYSmark92 results of 75.93 (Intel486 SX) and 47.23 (Cyrix).  They
>>indicate that Cyrix system "posted a SYSmark92 close to 38 percent
>>slower than its 486SX/25 sibling."
>>
>>SYSMark92 suite is a standard set of applications that are stimulated in
>>a repeatable manner using a set of commands that the BAPCo organization
>>developed after talking to 5000 users of these applications.  The
>>applications include spreadsheets (123, Excel, Quattro), word processors
>>(WordPerfect, WFW), data base (Paradox, dBase), presentation software,
>>graphics applications (Harvard), software development (MSC, Borland C).
>>These are the things most PC users regularly use and if not the
>>composite SYSMark92 metric, then the individual catagory metrics should
>>provide one with the ability to predict system performance on their
>>workload.
>>
>>rod
>...
>>
>>Rod Skinner				I speak for myself only.
>>Intel Corp
>>2200 Mission College Blvd RN4-21          PH (408) 765-4474
>>Santa Clara, CA 95052                     FAX (408) 765-4920
>
>Comparing 486SX performance to 486SLC performance is an apple-vs-orange
>comparison - the 486SX has a 32 bit bus, and the 486SLC has a 16 bit bus.

I don't think that is right. I think all 486 and 386 CPU's have to be 32-bit
except for the 386-sx's which are 286's with 386 internals. Nobody 
hardly uses 286's or 386sx's anymore.

>
>A more balanced comparison would be between a 486SX and a 486DLC at the
>same clock speed - and I would expect the 486SX to win by about 10% at
>the same clock speed.

A 486 DLC is the same thing as a SLC, just the SLC is a low-power 
chip for laptops. At least that is what I remembered.

>
>I am surprised Rod Skinner did not notice the discrepancy.
>
>Bill
>
>
>
>
>
>