VOGONS


Reply 40 of 46, by rmay635703

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
mkarcher wrote on 2021-07-30, 05:35:
BitWrangler wrote on 2021-07-30, 00:54:

edit: BTW do ya think the Microsoft spokesdroid had his trollface on when he said the 16 bit bus on the 286 crippled performance since it was on 8 bit ISA, yet the 8086 is also 16 bit, 🤣 ... maybe couldn't get 8088s in that speed grade? I dunno... I feel it wants a V30 anyway.

As I understand it, the microsoft spokesdroid tried to explain that the win from the 16-bit interface of thr processor is limited due to the 8-bit bus, because everything that misses the local memory cache has to be done in 8 bits. The local cache provides some noticeable gain, though. The 8086 is claimed to collect most of the gain you can get from the 16-bit local cache memory, so there is just a very small unused performance potential left to be picked up by the faster 80286.

It’s amazing how large that card is evenfor 1986? considering how little it actually does, 8086 is compatible with the 8 bit bus despite being 16 wide so all the card is doing is implementing a full speed cache.

What I never understood even historically is why this card did not allow you to remove your socketed memory (16/18 bits at a time) and place directly on this card.

Likewise a “local bus” daughter card(s) setup to drive a 8/16bit-10mhz video card or hard disk controller would have made these things fly and would have been no more complex than the cards that let you twin an ISA device along the base of another card.
Heck, even an existing 8 bit card twinned at 10mhz to this card would have reduced bottlenecks (many existing 8 bit cards would run at 9.5mhz)

Even at the time neither would have been particularly complex, just a very curious card, even more curious with Microsoft trying to sell hardware to get Windows sales

Reply 41 of 46, by Errius

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I ran Norton's SI on both an 8 MHz 8088 machine and 8 MHz 8086 machine. The Computing Index (CI) results were 1.7 and 1.9 respectively.

ETA: added text dumps

Attachments

  • Filename
    8088.txt
    File size
    949 Bytes
    Downloads
    12 downloads
    File license
    Public domain
  • Filename
    8086.txt
    File size
    908 Bytes
    Downloads
    12 downloads
    File license
    Public domain
Last edited by Errius on 2021-07-30, 20:16. Edited 1 time in total.

“I like to dissect PCs. Don't you know I'm utterly insane?"

Reply 42 of 46, by rmay635703

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Errius wrote on 2021-07-30, 17:57:

I ran Norton's SI on both an 8 MHz 8088 machine and 8 MHz 8086 machine. The Computing Index (CI) results were 1.7 and 1.9 respectively.

Depends on what you are doing and the Ram configuration.

Wait states being the same
try the classic how long does autocad take to render the stock model trick.

Based on that the 8086 is almost 2x faster

If you are bound to a hard drive or video bandwidth that is where things fall apart.

Reply 43 of 46, by Madao

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I am trying repair this MACH10.

China-8086 has short between clock-pin and ground ...

otherwise, it look good and i have buying NEC V30 for owner of MACH10.

I am hopeful 😀

Attachments

  • index.jpg
    Filename
    index.jpg
    File size
    170.14 KiB
    Views
    122 views
    File license
    Fair use/fair dealing exception

Reply 44 of 46, by Madao

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Successful , Mach10 from predador99 lives again.

msmach1.jpg
Filename
msmach1.jpg
File size
319.78 KiB
Views
102 views
File license
Fair use/fair dealing exception

Mach10 on XT Board with 4,77Mhz (which it means 9.54Mhz for 8086/V30 CPU) I use V30, because it was cheap.

mach10.jpg
Filename
mach10.jpg
File size
193.99 KiB
Views
103 views
File license
Fair use/fair dealing exception

Same, but 8088 with 8Mhz instead 4,77Mhz

8088turbo.jpg
Filename
8088turbo.jpg
File size
208.46 KiB
Views
103 views
File license
Fair use/fair dealing exception
Last edited by Madao on 2021-10-06, 18:34. Edited 1 time in total.