Article View: comp.sys.intel
Article #389Re: Intel (no)286, 386SX billboards
From: Peter da Silva
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1989 18:15
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1989 18:15
15 lines
1197 bytes
1197 bytes
The main problem I see with the 80386SX is that it doesn't have a clear market. For DOS and OS/2, a fast 80286 will provide better performance, and the 80386 mode is inaccesible. For UNIX, the 80386SX is shortchanged in horsepower... The figures I've seen indicate that an 80386 UNIX and an SX is less than a happy marriage. Now should OS/3 come out, that'd be different. But you can get a fast 286 now and change the chip if OS/3 comes out before the "486SX" :->. Who is using 80386es? And what are you using them for? -- `-_-' Peter da Silva <peter@ficc.uu.net> <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. 'U` -------------- +1 713 274 5180. "*Real* wizards don't whine about how they paid their dues" -- Quentin Johnson quent@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<6964@ficc.uu.net>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!texbell!sugar!ficc!peterReferences:
<CRUM.89Nov8231939@alicudi.usc.edu> <6475@lynx.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!texbell!sugar!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel Subject: Re: Intel (no)286, 386SX billboards Message-ID: <6964@ficc.uu.net> Date: 14 Nov 89 18:15:34 GMT References: <CRUM.89Nov8231939@alicudi.usc.edu> <6475@lynx.UUCP> Reply-To: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Distribution: comp Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 15