jarmolow@samsung.com (Tom Jarmolowski) (05/24/91)
Forget for the moment flames against the 286, I'm not advocating buying one but there are a lot of 286 machines out there. Does anyone KNOW why Windows 3.0 is a dog on a fast 286 ? Is graphics performance the real bottleneck or is the processor & memory managment just so brain dead that the rest of the application runs slowly too ? The real question is: Do the windows accelorator cards I saw at Comdex make a 286 usable for windows ? =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Tom Jarmolowski _/_ jarmolow@samsung.com Samsung Software America / __ _____ ...uunet!samsung!jarmolow One Corporate Drive (__ (_) / / <_ Voice: (508) 685-7200 x308 Andover MA 01810 Fax: (508) 685-4940
poirot@aio.jsc.nasa.gov (Daniel T. Poirot) (05/25/91)
In article <24462@samsung.samsung.com> jarmolow@samsung.com writes: > > Forget for the moment flames against the 286, I'm not advocating >buying one but there are a lot of 286 machines out there. Does anyone >KNOW why Windows 3.0 is a dog on a fast 286 ? You people are weird. For most uses, given enough memory and a high-res VGA, a 286 machine is fine. I have been running my 386 in standard mode from the time I figured out how to run it that way. -- Daniel Poirot poirot@aio.jsc.nasa.gov NASA JSC "The mind is a terrible thing." ER3 tel: (713)483-8793 Houston, TX 77058 fax: (713)483-3204
schwartz@.uucp (Michael Schwartz x1-6820) (05/26/91)
For the record, I used a 12MHz AT class machine with 4MB and 27ms disks for windows 3.0 use AND development with no problem (except the speed of MSC...). I used a Multisync 2D and a Wizard VGA plus in 1024x768x16 mode (not a recommended combination, but it was ok). Be sure to use a Smartdrive-like thing with 1M or so of memory (and set the min and max the same for fewest UAEs....) 'Course, I'm happier with a fast '486...... Michael -- schwartz@pogo.den.mmc.com "You'll find ... that the only thing mschwartz@mmc.com you can do easily is be wrong, DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed are and that's hardly worth the effort" not necessarily those of my employer or myself. --the phantom tollbooth
risto@tuura.UUCP (Risto Lankinen) (05/26/91)
jarmolow@samsung.com (Tom Jarmolowski) writes: > Forget for the moment flames against the 286, I'm not advocating >buying one but there are a lot of 286 machines out there. Does anyone >KNOW why Windows 3.0 is a dog on a fast 286 ? Hi! Here are some reasons: - With the same CPU speed, some of the opcodes really execute *slower* on a 386 than on a 286. While this is not the case with all opcodes, if the code was originally compiled for 80286 & optimized for speed, then the resulting code will not be optimal in speed for 80386 (just pretty close to optimal, anyway). - Because of better protection in 386, far references to code or data (which programs made for Windows are full of) take more time to run. - Due to virtual memory management, enhanced mode swaps (ie. writes to disk) even such segments, which have been declared 'DISCARDABLE'. In standard mode they're discarded (ie. 'forgotten' altogether) to make room for new allocations. The enhanced mode starts discarding not before the system memory *plus* the swap area are fully crowded. Therefore, with certain memory usage, standard mode just re-reads a segment while the enhanced mode unnecessarily writes and reads. (As can be noted, this is not a drawback of using the 386, but of using the Windows' default operating mode for the 386 .) > Is graphics performance the real bottleneck or is the processor >& memory managment just so brain dead that the rest of the application >runs slowly too ? I'm under the impression, that the best you can do with a 286 system and Windows, is, first, buying a LOT of memory and second, buying a FAST hard disk. > The real question is: Do the windows accelorator cards I saw >at Comdex make a 286 usable for windows ? I've had some bad experience of the accelerator cards with Windows. I've tested one, which had a 386 that took over the control from the 286 on the motherboard, turning it to handle the interrupts & I/O only. What happened with Windows? Well, the mouse interrupt is regarded pretty low in priority - usually. With the accelerator card, the 286 became the only source of interrupts for the 386, so the 'true' CPU lost the priority information of the interrupt - it saw them only coming from one source. This had the effect, that most of the execution time was spent serving the mouse, which generates interrupts in rapid succession all of the time it's being moved. The moral? Check the card with Windows before buying. Terveisin: Risto Lankinen -- Risto Lankinen / product specialist *************************************** Nokia Data Systems, Technology Dept * 2 3 * THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK * 2 +1 is PRIME! Now working on 2 -1 * replies: risto@yj.data.nokia.fi ***************************************
s902114@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Zen [Stuart Bishop]=) (05/26/91)
Yes. Windows is a dog on a 12Mhz '286. With only 1 Meg memory. I should know. And I am saving slowly....... -- _____ Two elephants fell off a cliff. Boom Boom. // // __ // // / \ I\ I for a good time call // // (-- I \I alias s902114@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au // // \__/ I I Stuart Bishop or zen@phoenix.pub.uu.oz.au // ((___________________________________________________________________// -- _____ Two elephants fell off a cliff. Boom Boom. // // __ //