paulj@b8.INGR.COM (Joey Paul x4129 ) (01/24/90)
Hi, I'm posting for a friend who's business is desperately needing to upgrade from and 8088 with a 20meg drive and 1-360k to something *faster*. This machine will be doing a considerable amount of number crunching/disk accessing etc. Any recommendations? She doesn't want to purchase *too* much hardware. However, she's wanting fast, not necessarily color, 40meg, 1-360k floppy and 1-1.44meg 3.5 floppy. She's looking at in the future going to a network. SHould she go with a 386? -- . | Joey Paul (205) 730-4129 . . "Ye must be born again." | uunet!ingr!dj4104!paulj (UUCP) . . | dj4104!paulj@ingr.com (INTERNET).
REISERT@VICTIM.enet.dec.com (Jim -- LTN1-2/H03 -- DTN 226-6905 24-Jan-1990 1057) (01/25/90)
In article <183@b8.INGR.COM>, paulj@b8.INGR.COM (Joey Paul x4129 ) writes... >This machine will be doing a considerable amount of number crunching/disk >accessing etc....Should she go with a 386? No, she should go with a 486 :-) Yes, she should get at least a 386, preferably with a floating point coprocessor. Northgate has 20 MHz systems for around 3K monochrome w/ coprocessor, 68 Meg hard disk and both kinds of floppies ("Country *and* Western"). A cache would probably help too, but I'm now past my own level of incompetence. jim =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= "The opinions expressed here in no way represent the views of Digital Equipment Corporation." James J. Reisert Internet: reisert@tallis.enet.dec.com Digital Equipment Corp. UUCP: ...decwrl!tallis.enet!reisert 295 Foster Street P.O. Box 1123 Littleton, MA 01460
akcs.amparsonjr@vpnet.UUCP (Anthony M. Parson, Jr.) (02/02/90)
I can vouch for the improvement that the 8087 will make in Generic Cadd. On an 8088 4.77 board, I thought the computer locked up when I added alphanumeric characters to a drawing, and then either rotated it, or moved a chunk of the info to a different spot in the drawing. On an 8088 at 8 mhz, it didn't look like it stopped, but I could see each individual pixel being drawn for the alphanumeric characters. On an 8088 at 8 mhz with 8087 (8 mhz), things REALLY improved-- I found I could live with this. Never got to try an 80286 with generic cadd, but I will say an 80386 (25 mhz) without a coprocessor, is STILL faster by far than the 8088/8087 combination. Moral: get a fast 80286 or 80386, and possibly save the cost of buying a math coprocessor. Of course, it depends how complicate your ddrawings are, how large, if you use letters / fonts to record dimensions, how many layers, etc.