munish@ms.uky.edu (Munish Mehra) (09/20/89)
I am putting together a 386 which will be used for graphics along with other things. My question is that does the cache make a significant difference and if so how much ? I have heard opposing views. i.e. the cache doesn't really make any difference and that it makes a big difference. Since 386 motherboards with cache are about $300 to $400 more expensive, I think it is better to use that towards a start on a good graphics coprocessor. Any views will be appreciated. Thanks
jfadams@tc.fluke.COM (Jim Adams) (09/21/89)
I use a Compaq 386/20e at work and built a 386 clone at home. The Compaq
runs at ~20MHz with a cache and the homebrew at 25MHz without one. They
both have 22ms Hard disks and 387 coprocessors. I cannot distinguish any
difference in performance between the two machines even when running
graphics-rich applications such as CAD programs and DTP programs. I would
sink my $ in a FAST disk drive.
In addition, some clone boards provide memory interleaving when all RAM
banks are filled, providing (for me, anyway) an increase in performance from
an equilavence of 25MHz to 31MHz.
-- Jim Adams
--
James F. Adams John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc. Everett, Washington USA
WORLD:jfadams@tc.fluke.COM
UUCP:{ihnp4!uw-beaver,ucbvax!lbl-csam,allegra,decvax!microsoft}!fluke!jfadams
ARPA:fluke!jfadams@uw-beaver.ARPA GEnie:J.F.ADAMS CIS:74036,2517