Date: Wednesday, 15 February 1989 02:22-MST From: Wm E. Davidsen To: 386users at TWG.COM Re: 80386 mailing list, vol 4 #8 80386 User's mailing list vol 4 #8 Feb 15, 1989 In this issue: Query about setting up a Mylex 386 Re: Query about setting up a Mylex 386 Advice wanted on Mylex MB, and Genoa EGA 16 vs. 32 bit ints on 80386 systems Re: another Intel chip rumor (80386 vs. 386SX) Re: Compaq 386/16 Intel Inboard 386/PC Request for 386 Recommendation The New PC Network and Inboard 386/ATs Gateway 2000 386 (25 mhz) Re: Intel Inboard 386/PC [ 2 msgs ] Inboard 386/AT (was Re: Intel Inboard 386/PC) Last word on inboard 386 The addresses for the list are now: 386users@TWG.COM - for contributions to the list or ...!uunet!TWG.COM!386users 386users-request@TWG.COM - for administrivia or ...!uunet!TWG.COM!386users-request P L E A S E N O T E If you want to get on or off the list, or change your address, please mail to the 386users-request address, or the message will be delayed by having to hand forward it (for your convenience, not mine). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: huilin@hpindda.HP.COM (Hui Lin Lim) Subject: Query about setting up a Mylex 386 Date: 18 Jan 89 18:45:36 GMT I have a HIMS386 which uses a Mylex motherboard. It allows the 1M of onboard RAM to be configured as 640+384 or 640+0 or 512+512. According to the Mylex tech support the extended memory always starts at 1M and this seems to be the case when I used the system on its own. (Note that unlike several other boards the Mylex does NOT use the 384K to shadow ROMs). The trouble started when I plugged an AST Advantage with 1.5M of RAM in. I thought that the simple answer was to configure the card so that the 1.5M started at 1402K (1M+384K) since the motherboard was set up for 640+384. My assuption was that I would not have a system with 2.5M of RAM running from 0-640K and 1024-2944K, unfortunately the memory check on boot up only shows 2176K (640K+1.5M) while it used to show 1024K before I put the card in. The system will run Windows/386 OK so I presume I don't have a hole in memory apart from 640-1M. The question is what happened to the remaining 384K? Mylex can't really help and suggested I call AST but I have a funny feeling that AST will give me the opposite advice. Mylex says that the memory check routines on power up look for ALL memory and not just in 512K blocks and I've read all the manuals thoroughly but can't find an answer. If any one has any suggestions I'd be extremely grateful. Mylex did suggest setting the m'board up as 512+512 then using the Advantage to backfill 128K and have the rest start at 1.5M. Problem is that I don't think the Advantage can be set up to do that. Again any advice would be most appreciated. Thanks. Hui-Lin Lim ARPA: huilin%hpda@hplabs.hp.com UUCP: {ucbvax,hplabs}!hpda!huilin Phone: (408)447-2835 ------------------------------ From: davidsen@steinmetz.ge.com (William E. Davidsen Jr) Subject: Re: Query about setting up a Mylex 386 Date: 23 Jan 89 18:33:56 GMT I think Mylex is right... I have used a Mylex board as 640+384 and all of the memory was there, so their hardware works as advertized. I *believe* that some models of AST board must be addresses on 512k boundaries under some conditions (like using 256k chips). I would check and see if your AST is in fact at 1MB, leaving you with 2 sets of chips starting at 1MB for the next 384k. -- bill davidsen (wedu@ge-crd.arpa) {uunet | philabs}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me ------------------------------ From: miker@csupwb.colostate.edu (Mike Riley) Subject: Advice wanted on Mylex MB, and Genoa EGA Date: 27 Jan 89 22:55:13 GMT Would any netlanders out there have any experience with the following pieces of hardware: a Mylex 386/20 motherboard with a 64K cache a Genoa super EGA graphics card. Any comments, positive or negative, would be most welcome. Please E-mail any replies to: Mike Riley at (BITNET) miker@csugreen.bitnet (INTERNET) miker@csupwb.ucc.colostate.edu or Rick Miranda at (BITNET) miranda@csugreen Thanks in advance. _________________________________________________________ |Mike Riley Internet: miker@csupwb.ucc.colostate.edu | | Bitnet: miker@csugreen.bitnet | ------------------------------ From: frank@rsoft.UUCP (Frank I. Reiter) Subject: 16 vs. 32 bit ints on 80386 systems Date: 16 Jan 89 21:31:43 GMT Thanks to everyone who replied to my question on whether there was an advantage to using short ints (16 bits) where 32 really were not required. These replies answer quite nicely: From: > In a 32-bit code segment (default is to use 32-bit registers) there is > actually a performance *penalty* for using 16-bit ints. Processing > the operand size override adds about one clock per instruction. In a > 32-bit C program you would want to use shorts only when you have to > match existing data structures in size, or when you are desparate for > data space. -- >From van-bc!ubc-cs!uunet!sco!seanf Sat Jan 14 04:44:00 1989 > Use 32-bit ints. The 80386 does everything in 32-bit chunks, for the most > part, and C will have subscripts converted to an int (32-bit) anyway. -- >From van-bc!ubc-cs!uunet!vrdxhq!drew Sat Jan 14 04:44:05 1989 > The most important thing to remember when doing operations on 32-bit > objects is long-word alignment. Remember that if a 32-bit object rests > on a word boundary, but not a long-word boundary, it still takes 2 reads > to get the object. Many compilers (including our Ada compiler) do not > automatically do this for you. When using 16-bit objects, you are virtually > guaranteed 1-read access to the object, as virtually all compilers start > objects on even boundaries. > > The actual performance difference will depend upon optimization/hardware > (code hoisting in loops, register variables, data caches, etc) available > in your situation, so it is not a simple issue. -- *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=* Frank I. Reiter \ / UUCP: {uunet,ubc-cs}!van-bc!rsoft!frank Langley, British Columbia / \ BBS: Mind Link @ (604)533-2312 *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=* ------------------------------ From: mslater@cup.portal.com (Michael Z Slater) Subject: Re: another Intel chip rumor (80386 vs. 386SX) Date: 19 Jan 89 04:35:36 GMT > I have heard that the difference between the 80386 and the 386SX is a > matter of a couple of interal pin connections and a retail price change > of something like $200. I don't believe this is true. Reliable sources have told me that it is indeed a different design. And by the way, the difference in price isn't that much -- as of July, the 1000-pc prices were $207 for the 386 and $165 for the SX, both at 16 MHz. The lower-cost package of the SX is in part responsible. A better example of pricing for perceived value rather than by mfr cost is the 386SX vs the 376. The 376 is basically the same as the SX, but lacks paging, real mode, and V86. It is priced at $99 in 100s -- dramatically less than the SX. Even though the chip size is possibly a bit smaller it certainly doesn't make that much difference. This is a clear indication that the 386 margins are very high, and that the basis of the price is DOS compatibility. You can think of the 376 as a "De-DOSed" 386SX, priced lower to appeal to the embedded control market but crippled so it won't compete with the SX. Michael Slater, Microprocessor Report mslater@cup.portal.com ------------------------------ From: philba@microsoft.UUCP (Phil Barrett) Subject: Re: Compaq 386/16 Date: 18 Jan 89 16:53:16 GMT This whole subject brings to light one of the more chaotic aspects of 386 machines. In general, there are 4 distinct 1Mb architectures out there. There may be others, I'm just not aware of them. 1) Compaq 386/xx machines with 1 Mb of memory relocate the remaining 384K way up high (15M + 640K). Int 15, AH=88 says 0. Its really there, you just need to know to get at it. (ie rtfm) Some of it (128K) is used to fast map the ROM BIOS. 2) Dell's architecture (based on a large Chip Manufacturer's ChipSet) doesnt relocate the 384K. It just sort of sits there under the expansion area. (ie, it runs from 640K to 1024K-1). Some of it is used for shadow ROM mapping. Thus a 1Mb Dell is really a 640K machine. 3) AT&T, Olivetti do similar to Compaq but Int 15, AH=88 returns the amount available. 4) IBM relocates their 384K to 1024K and INT 15, AH=88 says 384K. IMHO, IBM got it right. I hasten to add that these are all good machines but it sure is a pain to have to take these vagueries into account. Of course, this is all subject to change by the manufacturer (and may have already changed). Opinions expressed within are mine alone. Phil Barrett, Microsoft Corp. ------------------------------ From: kahn@xanth.cs.odu.edu (Gary I Kahn) Subject: Intel Inboard 386/PC Date: 19 Jan 89 01:31:34 GMT I'm considering upgrading my XT clone, and one of the alternatives is adding an Inboard 386/PC board. If anyone out there is doing the same, I suggest calling Intel's information number (800-538-3373). I called because I have a VGA card, and I wanted to know whether VGA is supported. The publicity literature mentions EGA, but not VGA. They said that VGA is supported, but that the video ROM cannot be copied into fast memory (as is possible with EGA). The woman from Intel didn't stop there, however. In order to be sure that I end up a satisfied customer, she asked for more information about my system and checked the information against some compatibility listings. As it turned out, my particular clone had 1 unsubstantiated report of being unable to boot with the Inboard 386/PC. The information person suggested, therefore, that I buy only from a retailer who will allow me to return it if it doesn't work. Since I didn't even ask for that information, and didn't suspect a problem (since I've never had a hardware incompatibility come up with anything else), I felt that this service was above and beyond the call of duty. She clearly had my satisfaction as a customer in mind, higher in importance than immediate profit. In summary, if you're not positive that your system will work with their product(s), call them first for some straight information. Gary I. Kahn kahn@odu.edu ------------------------------ From: reh2@nvuxf.UUCP (robert hausman) Subject: Request for 386 Recommendation Date: 18 Jan 89 21:28:55 GMT I'm looking to buy a 386/20 in the near future. The system will probably have a VGA card/monitor and something like a 70M hard disk. It has been suggested that I look at ALR as well as the new CompuAdd 386/20 machine. My two main considerations are reliability and cost. Anyone have any comments, suggestions, reviews, cautions, etc.? Please mail to me and I will post a summary in a couple weeks. Rob Hausman ...!bellcore!nvuxf!reh2 ------------------------------ From: galvin-peter@CS.Yale.EDU (Peter Galvin) Subject: The New PC Network and Inboard 386/ATs Date: 19 Jan 89 16:31:03 GMT A few weeks ago I requested information on the new PC Network, since the old one had gotten itself a deservedly bad reputation and went bankrupt. Well, knowing my credit card rights and having received no information about new experienced with NPCN I decided to give it a try. I decided to try them because they had a return guarantee and I wasn't sure if an Inboard 386/AT would work in my AT clone. I placed the order and was told that the item was not stocked and would have to be ordered from Intel, which would take an extra week. In fact it took an extra week but the board and cable arrived as promissed (at least they've improved on that score). I installed it and got part way through the boot sequence before it hung my system. After some mucking and talking Intel Tech Support said that it won't work in 12MHZ clones! Of course they didn't tell me that when I was first looking into the question. So I called NPCN and they said I could return the board for credit, but not cash. I guess I should have asked more detailed questions about the guarantee. The end result is that I do have the credit (I called to check) and that the Inboard 386/AT doesn't work in 12mhz 286 clones. At least PC Network seems to be on the up-and-up. A relatively happy story at least (but then any story is happy when lawyers don't get called in :-) --Peter __________________________________________ ________________________________ Peter Baer Galvin (203)432-1254 Senior Systems Programmer, Yale Univ. C.S. galvin-peter@cs.yale.edu 51 Prospect St, P.O.Box 2158, Yale Station ucbvax!decvax!yale!galvin-peter New Haven, Ct 06457 galvin-peter@yalecs.bitnet ------------------------------ From: harris@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Mark Harris) Subject: Gateway 2000 386 (25 mhz) Date: 22 Jan 89 01:01:52 GMT My brother is considering buying a Gateway 2000 computer and would like to hear of any relevant experiences from Gateway users. The machine he's looking at is a 25mhz 386 unit with 1 mb of 60 ns memory (expandable to 8 mb on the motherboard), 1 32-bit slot and several 16-bit slots, a 1.2 mb 5.25" floppy drive, a 1.44 mb 3.5" floppy drive, an 80 mb Seagate 28 ms hard drive, a 16-bit Paradise VGA+ board, NEC Multisynch II monitor, 2 serial ports, 1 parallel port, MS DOS 3.3. It comes in a tower configuration and has 30 day money-back, 1 year warranty. Price: $4195, with 4 mb: $5195. It sounds great - I just spent a fair amount more for my 20 mhz Everex model. Any comments on reliability, technical support, etc.? -- Mark Harris mail:harris@ecsvax(UUCP/BITNET) Department of Mathematical Sciences Appalachian State University Boone, NC 28608 (704) 262-3050 office, 264-6906 home ------------------------------ From: amlovell@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Anthony M Lovell) Subject: Re: Intel Inboard 386/PC Date: 22 Jan 89 16:08:19 GMT In article <7244@xanth.cs.odu.edu>, kahn@xanth.cs.odu.edu (Gary I Kahn) writes: [ story about how helpful Intel is in seeking customer satisfaction] I agree. I have an Inboard 386 PC in my XT and it's been giving sterling performance for 7 months. One day, I turn on the machine and it won't boot. After a week wasted at Computerland (they said my system board was bad) - I discovered that the machine booted if I replaced the 8088 chip. So I call Intel , worried that I did not have a receipt to get their macho FIVE YEAR LIMITED WARRANTY. The tech guy calmed me down and said it has happened that these boards cease to work and the fix is to remove them and re-install them (fixing, I guess, a connection that'd gone bad). I did this and discovered that this useful, inexpensive board is the world's first self-repairing peripheral. My continued impression of Intel is that it has outstanding ideas about service. -- amlovell@phoenix.princeton.edu ...since 1963. ------------------------------ From: mcmillan@schooner.cis.ohio-state.edu (Harold McMillan) Subject: Re: Intel Inboard 386/PC Date: 24 Jan 89 22:40:18 GMT In article <1478@neoucom.UUCP> wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) writes: >I strongly recommend that you not bother with the AT version of the >Inboard unless you have the one of the approved three PCs or else >can buy it with the understanding you may want to return the board. Makes sense; after all, if Intel says that the board will work with very few types of PC's, they probably have a good reason for saying it. The specified machines for the 8-bit bus version (Inboard 386/PC) are: IBM PC (all models), IBM PC XT (all models except IBM PC XT/286), Compaq Portable and Portable Plus, and Tandy 1200HD. The Inboard 386/PC is *not* compatible with 8086-based computers such as the Compaq Deskpro. The Intel BBS has messages posted from people who have gotten the Inboards to work with other machines. I have my Inboard 386/PC installed in an IBM PC. Installation was simple, the documentation is good, and the performance is outstanding. Highly recommended! -=- Hal McMillan | mcmillan@io.cis.ohio-state.edu | "Open the pod bay doors, HAL". CompuServe 72627,642 | ------------------------------ From: terry@eecea.eece.ksu.edu (Terry Hull) Subject: Inboard 386/AT (was Re: Intel Inboard 386/PC) Date: 25 Jan 89 14:59:46 GMT In article <1478@neoucom.UUCP> wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) writes: >I strongly recommend that you not bother with the AT version of the >Inboard unless you have the one of the approved three PCs or else >can buy it with the understanding you may want to return the board. I bought an Inboard386/AT about a year ago. At that time the Intel hot line had quite a list of machines that it would work with. I put mine in a PC Limited 286/8 and have had excellent results, although the machine was not on the "official" list of supported machines. My only complaint is the board will only accept 3 MB of 32 bit memory. -- Terry Hull Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Kansas State University INTERNET: terry@eecea.eece.ksu.edu Manhattan, KS 66502 UUCP: rutgers!ksuvax1!eecea!terry ------------------------------ From: calhoun@cis.ohio-state.edu (robert r. calhoun) Subject: Last word on inboard 386 Date: 26 Jan 89 18:13:28 GMT I have read some discussion about the inboard 386 which you place into your pc xt and am wondering is there anything that I wouldn't be able to do that I couldv'e done on it if I have bought a complete 386 system? ie Can I have multi-tasking? THANX. ------------------------------ End of 80386 M/L ****************