From: richb@rkbhome.jti.com (Rich Braun) Subject: Re: To cache or not to cache. Which machine to buy. Date: 12 Feb 1993 02:02:28 GMT
It occured to me that I hadn't seen a posting on this thread with a
definitive answer to the subject line.
I bought a 486SX/33 motherboard with no external cache. The processor
chip contains 8Kb of cache. For those who are choosing between SX and
DX, take note of the previous posting which described how the 486SX
came into existence. The 386SX was pure crap; it was much slower than
a 386DX because it had a smaller internal bus. (Hence the popular
connotation SX='SuX'.) The 486SX is a fine product, equivalent in every
way to the 486DX except that it lacks the floating-point accelerator.
I'd be curious to know if there are any Linux applications which run
significantly faster on a DX than on an SX. I saw no reason to shell
out the extra $150 for floating-point performance.
Soon after buying my system last month, the store started offering an
external 256K cache version of the motherboard for just $60 extra.
I'm curious as to how much performance difference there is between
these two hardware products, given the usual mix of Linux applications
(X, gcc, etc). Not that it matters for me--my system is already in
place--but it might benefit others who have taken the Linux plunge and
are considering taking advantage of today's low PC prices to set up a
real home workstation.
-rich