tslu@oliveb.UUCP (04/13/87)
> Saw and played with new IBMs today. > > 1) Norton Sysinfo says it's 1.9 times the speed of a PC. I was not blown away > by this. My 90$ 4-layer 8MHZ clone board is rather a bit faster than > that. The on-board RAM is apparently the same (?). This is not a good > deal as far as I am concerned, since an AT clone is ~1200$ and that > will blow the socks off the new IBM. I could not agree more. The Performance System's 386 machine is 21 ( YES, I SAID 21 ) times the speed of a PC, but its basic model cost only $2,895. This is less expensive than the 20M 8086 based IBM System 30 with color monitor ( $3,095 ). Price / Performance comparison: IBM Model 30: 3,095 / 1.9 = 1629 ( $ per PC performance ) Performance 386: 2,895 / 21 = 138 Now: 1629 / 138 = 11.8 ( Wow !!!! )
dalegass@dalcs.UUCP (04/17/87)
In article <816@oliveb.UUCP> tslu@oliveb.UUCP (Shang Lu) writes: >> Saw and played with new IBMs today. >> >> 1) Norton Sysinfo says it's 1.9 times the speed of a PC. I was not blown away ...[ More PS/2 bashing ] :-) >I could not agree more. The Performance System's 386 machine is 21 >( YES, I SAID 21 ) times the speed of a PC, but its basic model cost ^^^^-- Where did you get this number? >only $2,895. This is less expensive than the 20M 8086 based IBM System 30 >with color monitor ( $3,095 ). ...[ More comparisons ] Is 21x a number from Norton's SI? Haven't people stopped using SI yet? It's insane! I tried a few things on a 16MHz Compaq 386 recently and got SI=7.0, the machine did not blow me away but it seemed quite nice. SI=21 sounds too good to be true, and if it sounds too good.... Is the Compaq that bad in comparison or did I have my foot on the brakes :-) Anyone know how long until we see the iAPX486? -Jeff Scrutton "Programming: The Turing test; only backwards."