bnk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Bob N Keenan) (05/07/91)
Hello- I install computer systems on the university campus here and I usually install GATEWAY 2000's. I also own a 386-20MHz from Gateway. Today I installed a couple of NEW gateway 386sx's and learned that they have dramatically changed their machines. The footprint is much smaller, the color is different, and the shape is contoured - like. (I dont like any of these changes - it all looks TOO PLASTIC), but one thing I noticed that these 386sx's 16MHZ just blow my 386/20 away when it comes to WINDOWS!! It is noticably MUCH FASTER, and my question is how is this done??? and why are these SX's faster than my 20mhz dx???? any info would be appreciated. thanks.... -bob keenan
n65j@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (05/08/91)
In article <11889@uwm.edu>, bnk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Bob N Keenan) writes: > > Hello- > > I install computer systems on the university campus here and I usually > install GATEWAY 2000's. I also own a 386-20MHz from Gateway. Today > I installed a couple of NEW gateway 386sx's and learned that they have > dramatically changed their machines. The footprint is much smaller, > the color is different, and the shape is contoured - like. (I dont like > any of these changes - it all looks TOO PLASTIC), but one thing I noticed > that these 386sx's 16MHZ just blow my 386/20 away when it comes to WINDOWS!! > It is noticably MUCH FASTER, and my question is how is this done??? and > why are these SX's faster than my 20mhz dx???? any info would be appreciated. thanks.... > > -bob keenan > (Not speaking from Gateway experience) Are you sure that these are 16MHz SX's, or might they not be delivering 20MHz models with caches nowadays? Gateway's recent ads don't quote a clock rate for the SX, even though they do for everything else. A cached 20 MHz SX might well outperform an uncached 20 MHz DX. The memory architecture and speed rating (which determine memory wait states) might also differ. Also, Windows performance would depend on memory capacity and hard drive performance. The 17ms IDE hard drives and 4Mb of memory in Gateway's current SX configuration sound like good approaches for Windows. What does your 20 MHz DX machine have? Yet another variable is the video display card. Not all VGAs are created equal and Windows 3 on a 16-bit Tseng ET4000 VGA card will be much faster at screen redraws than an older 8-bit VGA with an earlier generation of VGA chip. (Don't know what Gateway is using for VGAs now.) Probably a few more variables to boot. Disk cache software the same? Much hard drive fragmentation on your older machine? ... -- regards, Steve Pacenka, Cornell U.
plim@hpsgwp.sgp.hp.com (Peter Lim) (05/09/91)
/ n65j@vax5.cit.cornell.edu / 8:07 am May 8, 1991 / writes: $ clock rate for the SX, even though they do for everything else. A cached $ 20 MHz SX might well outperform an uncached 20 MHz DX. The memory $ architecture and speed rating (which determine memory wait states) might $ also differ. $ How ? Assuming the 20 MHz SX is running at zero wait state and the 20 MHz DX is running at 1 wait state. Given that SX take 2 cycle to fetch 32 bit and DX does that in 1 cycle, this would mean the SX running at the same speed as a DX. Actually, cached machine doesn't give you exactly 0 wait state (just close to zero). And these days any 386 design would have some kind of interleave memory which usually reduce wait state to less than 1. These 2 points mean that 20 MHz DX should run faster than 20 MHz SX ---- unless you are not fetching 32 bit data. Regards, ___o``\________________________________________________ ___ __ _ _ Peter Lim. V````\ @ @ . .. ... .- -> 76 MIPS at under US$20K !! --- -- - - /.------------------------------------------------ === == = = >--_// . .. ... .- -> 57 MIPS at under US$12K !! `' . If you guessed SUN, IBM or DEC, you are wrong ! E-mail: plim@hpsgwg.HP.COM Snail-mail: Hewlett Packard Singapore, Tel: (065)-279-2289 (ICDS, ICS) Telnet: 520-2289 1150 Depot Road, Singapore 0410. #include <standard_disclaimer.hpp>
james@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (James Alfred Monschke) (05/10/91)
In article <11889@uwm.edu>, bnk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Bob N Keenan) writes: > > Hello- > > I install computer systems on the university campus here and I usually > install GATEWAY 2000's. I also own a 386-20MHz from Gateway. Today > I installed a couple of NEW gateway 386sx's and learned that they have > dramatically changed their machines. The footprint is much smaller, > the color is different, and the shape is contoured - like. (I dont like > any of these changes - it all looks TOO PLASTIC), but one thing I noticed > that these 386sx's 16MHZ just blow my 386/20 away when it comes to WINDOWS!! > It is noticably MUCH FASTER, and my question is how is this done??? and > why are these SX's faster than my 20mhz dx???? any info would be appreciated. thanks.... > I believe that this is explained by Gateway's "Diamond Scan" video card. To put it simply, it's stinkin' fast. One magazine's review (I don't have it with me) benchmarked the card as being twice as fast as Compaq's VGA (compaq's VGA was tightly integrated on the motherboard for speed). Other reviews have noticed simialer gains to differing degrees, probably differing because of the reviewerss testing the cards speed on different operations. -- ******************************************************************************** James Monschke * Jerry Falwell is the james@matt.ksu.ksu.edu * Anti-Christ!!!! "A dirty old man in a young man's body." *
brandis@inf.ethz.ch (Marc Brandis) (05/10/91)
In article <3370025@hpsgwp.sgp.hp.com> plim@hpsgwp.sgp.hp.com (Peter Lim) writes: >How ? Assuming the 20 MHz SX is running at zero wait state and the 20 MHz >DX is running at 1 wait state. Given that SX take 2 cycle to fetch 32 bit >and DX does that in 1 cycle, this would mean the SX running at the same >speed as a DX. This is not completely correct. The 386 requires two (machine) cycles to fetch a word (best case), so the values would be 3 cycles (2 + 1 wait state) vs. 2 cycles. Marc-Michael Brandis Computer Systems Laboratory, ETH-Zentrum (Swiss Federal Institute of Technology) CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland email: brandis@inf.ethz.ch
pburke@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Peter Burke, MIC, 263-7744) (05/13/91)
In article <1991May10.013708.6059@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu>, james@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (James Alfred Monschke) writes... >In article <11889@uwm.edu>, >bnk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Bob N Keenan) writes: >> >> Hello- >> >> I install computer systems on the university campus here and I usually >> install GATEWAY 2000's. I also own a 386-20MHz from Gateway. Today >> I installed a couple of NEW gateway 386sx's and learned that they have >> dramatically changed their machines. The footprint is much smaller, >> the color is different, and the shape is contoured - like. (I dont like >> any of these changes - it all looks TOO PLASTIC), but one thing I noticed >> that these 386sx's 16MHZ just blow my 386/20 away when it comes to WINDOWS!! >> It is noticably MUCH FASTER, and my question is how is this done??? and >> why are these SX's faster than my 20mhz dx???? any info would be appreciated. thanks.... >> >I believe that this is explained by Gateway's "Diamond Scan" video card. To >put it simply, it's stinkin' fast. One magazine's review (I don't have it >with me) benchmarked the card as being twice as fast as Compaq's VGA (compaq's >VGA was tightly integrated on the motherboard for speed). Other reviews >have noticed simialer gains to differing degrees, probably differing because >of the reviewerss testing the cards speed on different operations. > The Speedstar really is extremely fast, but it doesn't come with the new 20MHz SX machines. These units have a built in paradise chipset card - interlaced and not very exciting. In our demo room we are currently testing 2 Gateway machines - a 25MHz DX (no cache) and the 20 MHz SX. The DX comes with the Speedstar and is far faster running windows - even in 1024x768x256. The SX isn't bad, but once you switch to that resolution (in 16 colors) it becomes oily. The worst video mode on the SX is 800x600x256. It is so slow that one loses the cursor when moving the mouse. Absolutely unusable. In 800x600x16 it is fast and sharp, though. The design of the SX is quite a deviation from Gateway's older machines. The motherboard is now made by GATEWAY - scary? A technician at Gateway told me it really was a Texas Instruments board, but it sure isn't a Micronics. (They still sell the old Micronics-based 16MHz SX machines, although they don't advertise them anymore). The built-in video card means that if you want to upgrade to the Speedstar it will take up one slot and cost you a bundle (since you can't drop the built-in video). It does have five slots, though. There is no open drive bay, so if more HD-space is required, one drive has to go. Experiences: When we received the machine it died on us whenever we used the turbo button while running Windows. One day it just didn't die anymore and has been running fine since. As already mentioned above, the video is not very exciting. The 80MB HD is quite fast. We installed an ethernet board and got the machine to work on our novell network within two hours. (Same for the 25MHz DX). The design: hideous was one of the first responses. Especially how they changed the MAG computronics monitors - as if they rented a wind channel for a week :-) It looks like pretty cheap plastic, but behind it is still one of the best monitors one can get. The keyboards we received were a semi-tactile kind - not a northgate, but far better than the old keytronics that Gateway used to ship. The new design that they are advertising in the latest PC-magazine (and ship with any machine as of last week) look like the omnikey from Northgate but I haven't been able to get my hands on one of them. I don't like that the inverted cursor T is gone. I hope they give you the option to still by a 101 key keyboard. Any specific questions on those two machines - just email me. Peter
phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Phil Howard KA9WGN) (05/14/91)
pburke@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Peter Burke, MIC, 263-7744) writes: > The design: hideous was one of the first responses. Especially how >they changed the MAG computronics monitors - as if they rented a wind >channel for a week :-) It looks like pretty cheap plastic, but behind >it is still one of the best monitors one can get. I assume you mean what they are selling as their "Crystal Scan 1024NI". Have you compared this with, say, the Sony 1304? I am all ready to order one of these machines (25 MHz DX no-cache) but because it is a work machine, paid for by the department, I need to make sure I get the right monitor the first time around, and no one around here has either one of these. All the existant G2000 machines here have some different kind of monitor. > The keyboards we received were a semi-tactile kind - not a northgate, >but far better than the old keytronics that Gateway used to ship. The >new design that they are advertising in the latest PC-magazine (and ship >with any machine as of last week) look like the omnikey from Northgate >but I haven't been able to get my hands on one of them. I don't like >that the inverted cursor T is gone. I hope they give you the option to >still by a 101 key keyboard. Would you recommend the Northgate keyboard? I will be using the keyboard A LOT for programming and editing. I'd also like to get the CNTL key back to the NORMAL place just to the left of "A" (Caps Lock is not even needed). >Any specific questions on those two machines - just email me. Posted since they are not specific. Anyone who knows the answers is most welcome to answer by email or news. Thanks. -- /***************************************************************************\ / Phil Howard -- KA9WGN -- phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu | Guns don't aim guns at \ \ Lietuva laisva -- Brivu Latviju -- Eesti vabaks | people; CRIMINALS do!! / \***************************************************************************/
pburke@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Peter Burke, MIC, 263-7744) (05/14/91)
In article <1991May14.053655.27468@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Phil Howard KA9WGN) writes... > >I assume you mean what they are selling as their "Crystal Scan 1024NI". >Have you compared this with, say, the Sony 1304? I am all ready to >order one of these machines (25 MHz DX no-cache) but because it is a >work machine, paid for by the department, I need to make sure I get the >right monitor the first time around, and no one around here has either >one of these. All the existant G2000 machines here have some different >kind of monitor. One of my friends recently bought a system from EPS (Gateway's neighbors in South Dakota) with a Sony 1304HG and the Orchid ProDesigner card. The card is slower than the Speedstar (in Windows) and the monitor - well - I think it is not as useful in the 1024x768 as the Computronics that Gateway ships. The sharpness of the Sony is impressive, but it results into such fine characters under icons in Windows that one cannot read them unless one is 10 inches in front of the tube. This may be because the Speedstar Card supplies some fonts for this resolution, but the overall impression of the Computronics, ignoring this difference in the readability of fonts althogether, is that it is at least as good as the Sony. The price difference is not justified (Gateway did charge $250 extra to ship the Sony). I wouldn't pick the Sony even at the same price. The 1024NI and the regular CrystalScan are except for the type of phosphor used on the CRT identical. Both are very sharp into the corners (maybe because the tube is more spherical than the Sony's - if you don't like curved tubes, buy something else) and the colors are richer than in any other monitor I have seen, except maybe the Zenith FTM, which is not a comparable product, though. > >Would you recommend the Northgate keyboard? I will be using the keyboard >A LOT for programming and editing. I'd also like to get the CNTL key back >to the NORMAL place just to the left of "A" (Caps Lock is not even needed). Northgate started the trend with these 130-key keyboards. Now, after 2 years of telling their customers that IBM's design of the 101 key was bad, they finally start pushing the normal layout. It is cheaper and the feel - the real advantage of the Northgate - is really nice. I actually saw original Northgate keyboards sold through some mailorder outfits for more than $20 below Northgates own price. A cheaper alternative to the Northgate is the "Focus 101", which feels almost identical to the Northgate, comes with a hinged dustcover/copystand and costs only $49 mailorder (somewhere in the front of Computer Shopper). I own this keyboard and can only complain about a sometimes slightly squeeky noise coming from the springs under the spacebar. Otherwise a much better keyboard than what Gateway used to ship (again, I don't know their new one).
tjr@cbnewsc.att.com (thomas.j.roberts) (05/14/91)
From article <1991May14.135043.21680@macc.wisc.edu>, by pburke@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Peter Burke, MIC, 263-7744): > In article <1991May14.053655.27468@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Phil Howard KA9WGN) writes... > >> >>I assume you mean what they are selling as their "Crystal Scan 1024NI". >>Have you compared this with, say, the Sony 1304? I am all ready to >>order one of these machines (25 MHz DX no-cache) but because it is a >>work machine, paid for by the department, I need to make sure I get the >>right monitor the first time around, and no one around here has either >>one of these. All the existant G2000 machines here have some different >>kind of monitor. > > One of my friends recently bought a system from EPS (Gateway's > neighbors in South Dakota) with a Sony 1304HG and the Orchid ProDesigner > card. The card is slower than the Speedstar (in Windows) and the monitor > - well - I think it is not as useful in the 1024x768 as the Computronics > that Gateway ships. The sharpness of the Sony is impressive, but it > results into such fine characters under icons in Windows that one cannot > read them unless one is 10 inches in front of the tube. This may be > because the Speedstar Card supplies some fonts for this resolution, but > the overall impression of the Computronics, ignoring this difference in > the readability of fonts althogether, is that it is at least as good as > the Sony. The price difference is not justified (Gateway did charge $250 > extra to ship the Sony). I wouldn't pick the Sony even at the same > price. Ah, but do you see flicker in a screen refreshed at 60 Hz ?? If you do, then I strongly recommend the Diamond SpeedSTAR and the Sony 1304. This combination can do all text modes, 640x480 graphics and 800x600 graphics at 72 Hz vertical scan rate. NO Crystal Scan monitor can do this!! One of them (1024NI ?) can do 800x600 @ 72Hz, but not 640x480; the other (1024 ?) can do 640x480 @ 72Hz, but not 800x600. The Sony 1304 can do both at 72Hz. For me this overwhelms all other considerations, as I find the flicker @ 60Hz to be unbearable. I know of no setup that can do 1024x768 @ 72Hz, which does not cost more than I am willing to spend. I use Windows in 800x600 mode, and that's fine. The SpeedSTAR/1304 can also to 1024x768 @ 60Hz noninterlaced, but I cannot stand the flicker. The Diamond SpeedSTAR also includes Windows fonts so that text in 800x600 and 1024x768 modes does NOT get smaller - icons do get smaller. This board is also very fast - I highly recommend it! Tom Roberts att!ihlpl!tjrob TJROB@IHLPL.ATT.COM
pburke@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Peter Burke, MIC, 263-7744) (05/15/91)
In article <1991May14.150425.503@cbnewsc.att.com>, tjr@cbnewsc.att.com (thomas.j.roberts) writes... >From article <1991May14.135043.21680@macc.wisc.edu>, by pburke@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Peter Burke, MIC, 263-7744): >> In article <1991May14.053655.27468@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, phil@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Phil Howard KA9WGN) writes... >> >>> >>>I assume you mean what they are selling as their "Crystal Scan 1024NI". >>>Have you compared this with, say, the Sony 1304? I am all ready to >>>order one of these machines (25 MHz DX no-cache) but because it is a >>>work machine, paid for by the department, I need to make sure I get the >>>right monitor the first time around, and no one around here has either >>>one of these. All the existant G2000 machines here have some different >>>kind of monitor. >> >> One of my friends recently bought a system from EPS (Gateway's >> neighbors in South Dakota) with a Sony 1304HG and the Orchid ProDesigner >> card. The card is slower than the Speedstar (in Windows) and the monitor >> - well - I think it is not as useful in the 1024x768 as the Computronics >> that Gateway ships. The sharpness of the Sony is impressive, but it >> results into such fine characters under icons in Windows that one cannot >> read them unless one is 10 inches in front of the tube. This may be >> because the Speedstar Card supplies some fonts for this resolution, but >> the overall impression of the Computronics, ignoring this difference in >> the readability of fonts althogether, is that it is at least as good as >> the Sony. The price difference is not justified (Gateway did charge $250 >> extra to ship the Sony). I wouldn't pick the Sony even at the same >> price. > >Ah, but do you see flicker in a screen refreshed at 60 Hz ?? If you No - I don't, at least not when you sit right in front of it. But then, some people are more sensitive than others to screen flicker. We installed the Windows "paper" wallpaper on the Gateway with the 1024NI - this is one of the most "flicker-prone" images that are unbearable on interlaced cards (like our IBM 8514A). Large white areas on the Gateway are also very nice, flicker is visible from a larger distance (30ft or more), but not as bad as on other machines with a far higher price tag (I am thinking of those MAC IIfx machines we have here) Sure, I haven't seen the Sony with the Speedstar - the main flaw I noticed (with an Orchid Prodesigner) was the size of the fonts. Since the Speedstar should fix that it might be worth considering for someone who absolutely doesn't want flicker.
lemson@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (David Lemson) (05/15/91)
bnk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Bob N Keenan) writes: >Hello- > I install computer systems on the university campus here and I usually > install GATEWAY 2000's. I also own a 386-20MHz from Gateway. Today > I installed a couple of NEW gateway 386sx's and learned that they have > that these 386sx's 16MHZ just blow my 386/20 away when it comes to WINDOWS!! > It is noticably MUCH FASTER, and my question is how is this done??? and > why are these SX's faster than my 20mhz dx???? any info would be appreciated. thanks.... Just from scanning the new ads from Gateway, I see that the new SX's are 20 MHz SX's with CPU caches. This would give an immense speed improvement in some applications. Really doesn't make me happy...I just bought a 16 MHz Gateway 386SX...they are giving me $85 for their lowering of the price of my machine, though. (I got them to take off the shipping, etc...but the rebate assumes I paid full price for my machine. Oh, well) -- David Lemson University of Illinois Computing Services Consultant Internet : lemson@uiuc.edu UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson
ericb@hplsla.HP.COM (Eric Backus) (05/16/91)
I tried the Crystal Scan 1024NI and switched to the Sony 1304HG. I find the Sony to have better clarity at 800x600 and at 1024x768. While 60Hz flicker is not a problem for me, it could be for you, and if so you should realize that the Crystal Scan 1024NI can do 800x600 at 72Hz but will only do 640x480 at 60Hz. The Sony can do both of these at 72Hz. In my opinion, the Sony is worth the price of the upgrade. -- Eric Backus ericb%hplsla@hplabs.hp.com (206) 335-2495
paulm@sci.ccny.cuny.edu (Paul Matulonis) (05/16/91)
(stuff deleted about fast gateway2000's...) We just took delivery of a G2000 33mHz / 120Mb /4Mb machine and it too is fast, especially in disk ops. Turns out they have the whole extra 3meg configured for MS Smartdrive diskcache. Maybe the fast SX machines are just using a little gimmickry to make it seem like windows is really running fast?