First post, by metrox
I have a AcerAcros 486DX 67Mhz (according to Norton Utilities systeminfo) that I suspect is 66Mhz?
anyway would it be worth it to upgrade to a DX2 66 chip?
I have a AcerAcros 486DX 67Mhz (according to Norton Utilities systeminfo) that I suspect is 66Mhz?
anyway would it be worth it to upgrade to a DX2 66 chip?
No. I guess you already have a 486 DX2 66.
SI seems to read AcerAcros from your BIOS.
And DX seems to be a display failure, or SI doesn't care about that.
SI CPU benchmark has my machine at 96.7 and the DX2-66 at 141.7
It's just a "rounding error"... clockrates are often off a tiny bit.
Without knowing what SI tests for it's hard to say where your system falls short, but I guess it's slow memory(slow/missing cache) related.
Run speedsys and see what you get there.
wrote:It's just a "rounding error"... clockrates are often off a tiny bit.
Without knowing what SI tests for it's hard to say where your system falls short, but I guess it's slow memory(slow/missing cache) related.
Run speedsys and see what you get there.
Second this - most likely, your CMOS settings are not optimized and thus you are getting a lower SI reading.
Also try Navrátil Software System Information (NSSI) 0.60 - http://www.navsoft.cz/products.htm
Turn down memory wait states as low as you can get them (in the bios) without dos failing to start and run the test again. Old machines can vary in performance massively from memory wait states, or if they don't have any l2 cache installed. Oh, and if your pc has a turbo button, try hitting it again, mass confusion abounds when turbo being on actually slows the computer down :p
Also, wouldn't hurt to open your pc and dust off the cob webs and grab a few pictures of the CPU / cache (if its there) and ram
Sup. I like computers. Are you a computer?
Unfortunately the AcerAcros has a pretty limited bios system, but system cache is "on" but there's not much settings that you are allowed to change.
I also ran the NSSI software, and my DX266 Acer is slightly slower than others...
Here is the results from speedsys.
wrote:Looks like no L2 cache is installed. That would likely account for the difference, or at least much of it.
I guess the only way to find out if I have L2 cache is if I open the case and check out the motherboard ?
Even if there's L2 Cache it's nearly as slow as main memory - in either case speedsys and Co. show "no 2nd level cache". OEM based systems are often snails because they were built with reliability or price in mind and not performance.
The Siemens Pentium60 board I had was similar in approach - nice but no tweaking possible.
Maybe the bios can be modded but I do have no experience with that.