cyamamot@castor.usc.edu (Cliff Yamamoto) (10/18/88)
In article <1718@dataio.Data-IO.COM> bright@dataio.Data-IO.COM (Walter Bright) writes: >In article <6959@dasys1.UUCP> schuster@dasys1.UUCP (Michael Schuster) writes: >>They slowed down the timers on a 10 mHz AT board to make it look as >>though it was running speed programs at quadruple speed. The >>current scuttlebut is that there is no "40 mHz Chang modification". > >A friend of mine had a PC clone once that had a great Norton SI rating. >After a while, he discovered that the reason for it was that the clone >manufacturer had put in a 'slow' clock! Moral: before believing results >based on the system clock, do a reality check with your watch! > >(No, I don't remember the manufacturer. It was an off-brand, though, >and very cheap.) One such company is Sefco. They're some off brand out-fit here in L.A. My friend had also purchased a XT-clone a few years ago with an unbelievable SI rating. Turned out his timer was running slow (though he refused to believe me - for admitting that he was suckered). All you have to do is run the PC-Mag benchmark and selected "Time the Timer". Use your stopwatch and there you have it. Seems the timers (in XT's a least) are initialized upon cold-boot by the BIOS. I'm assuming this because I replaced his "Erso" bios with both a Phoenix and an IBM BIOS and his SI fell to 1.8 (w/ a V20) just like I expected. Cliff Yamamoto