From: peter da silva (peter@ferranti.com)
Date: 11/02/92


From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Subject: Re: 486SXs as Unix Iron?
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 19:43:09 GMT

In article <1992Nov1.162204.1361@mccc.edu> pjh@mccc.edu (Pete Holsberg) writes:
> In article <id.BTJU.6P@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes:
> =A 486SX is a better choice than any 386DX I know of.

> =Objectively, the 486SX is an OK chip, and the marketing
> =bullshit can be avoided by careful motherboard choices.

> What makes it a better choice and "an OK chip"?

A better choice:

You get the same or more MIPS out of a lower clock rate part, which means
less power dissipation on your system board, you can use cheaper RAM without
taking a big hit in wait states, and your system is likely to last longer.
I don't like high clock rates. They make digital components exhibit more and
more analogue behaviours. This worries me.

An OK chip:

It provides the same 386 programming model we know and love, the same ghastly
instruction set -- but if you're looking at other 386 type chips that's not
likely to be a problem: they all have it. You can run commodity software on
it pretty damn fast without worries. The same is true of the other 386DX class
chips, of course.

-- 
% Peter da Silva % 77487-5012 % +1 713 274 5180 % Har du kramat din varg idag?
/C{setlinecap}def/L{lineto}def/M{moveto}def/H{newpath 0 C 0 19 M 0 25 L 4 21 L
0 16 M 5 16 L 8 13 L 4 13 L 1 16 L 8 13 M 8 8 L stroke 2 C 10 6 M 8 8 L 10 8 L
stroke}def/T{translate}def 72 72 T 24 24 scale H 20 0 T -1 1 scale H showpage