It is a big pity IBM never sold 386DX40 with MCA bus. The 40Mhz AMD version came pretty late in 1991 though. That resolved the 16bit bottleneck of ISA bus in 386. Perhaps someone can solder 386DX40 on IBM MCA board. MCA was frowned upon, but it was a perfect solution for 386. Early 486DX/33 also had just 16bit ISA, it was even in worse situation.

AlexZ wrote on Yesterday, 20:27:

It is a big pity IBM never sold 386DX40 with MCA bus. The 40Mhz AMD version came pretty late in 1991 though. That resolved the 16bit bottleneck of ISA bus in 386. Perhaps someone can solder 386DX40 on IBM MCA board. MCA was frowned upon, but it was a perfect solution for 386. Early 486DX/33 also had just 16bit ISA, it was even in worse situation.

I dont think isa is a bottleneck in a 386, my test in a 486DLC-33 show me marginal gain with VLB cards, and same mobo with 386 almost close ISA vs VLB

The only good side is in VLB chipset are new, better win3.1 acceleration etc

theelf wrote on Yesterday, 22:38:

I dont think isa is a bottleneck in a 386, my test in a 486DLC-33 show me marginal gain with VLB cards, and same mobo with 386 almost close ISA vs VLB

VLB was worth it for VESA VBE SVGA modes because of the high resolutions. I would recommend that you test it with a benchmark that utilizes SVGA modes. For example 640 x 480 or 800 x 600 with 256 colors.

Exploit wrote on Yesterday, 22:57:

theelf wrote on Yesterday, 22:38:

I dont think isa is a bottleneck in a 386, my test in a 486DLC-33 show me marginal gain with VLB cards, and same mobo with 386 almost close ISA vs VLB

VLB was worth it for VESA VBE SVGA modes because of the high resolutions. I would recommend that you test it with a benchmark that utilizes SVGA modes. For example 640 x 480 or 800 x 600 with 256 colors.

In general you will not use much high res stuff on 386 in dos

and even you use, to have some gain, the software need to support some acceleration

raw speed 640x480 is similar, i already tested, no big difference to justify invest in isa replacement

16bit ISA bus was limiting for video transfers in 640x480, you could get may be 10 fps. It was used by games like Transport Tycoon or Settlers 2. Playing SVGA games on ISA VGA is not recommended. I OCed ISA bus to improve SVGA performance.

16bit ISA bus wasn't a bottleneck for IO at the time of 386 as period correct hard drives were slow.

VLB came late and became obsolete after like 2 years. MCA existed for far longer and was usable for more than 2 expansion cards.

Hilarious how this thread is more about everything you can't do on a 286 than what you actually can do.

BinaryDemon wrote on Today, 09:36:

Hilarious how this thread is more about everything you can't do on a 286 than what you actually can do.

Whats the difference?

These two topics are pretty related, we are not discussing pentium era here. There are also a couple of pages with list of suitable games.

I have tried playing Wolfenstein 3d vga yesterday on my 86Box 286 running at 16Mhz and it is playable, better than what the youtube video suggests, but I wouldn't say it is too enjoyable. You wouldn't play it, same as you wouldn't play Doom on 386 with low details nowadays.

theelf wrote on Today, 10:52:

Whats the difference?

What you 'can't do' is obviously a much longer list.

EDIT- It's also not the question the OP asked.

BinaryDemon wrote on Today, 12:03:

theelf wrote on Today, 10:52:

Whats the difference?

What you 'can't do' is obviously a much longer list.

mm... i dont know

I have a pretty nice 286 setup and compared to 386+ the cant do list is not sooo long

Of course is not same a 286 8mhz with cga/hercules than mine, a 25mhz harris, 4mb, 8900D vga etc

AlexZ wrote on Today, 11:16:

. You wouldn't play it, same as you wouldn't play Doom on 386 with low details nowadays.

thats exactly why many of us build 286/386 etc machines