CompuServe Thread

#486 BridgeBoards

17 messages in this thread
#75883From: Dave CinegeNov 4, 1992 4:48 AM
EMC is now shipping their 486SLC bridgeboards. They are running at 33Mhz and come with 3MB of ram stock. To all the people bound to see the ad for the 486SLC Gloden Gate board avalible from Vortex. Please give us a call before you go out to get one. We really BLOW vortex away with our speed and features. Give the number below a call if you would like more information. We'll be happy to Snail Mail, or fax our current brochure to you. Dave Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 – via Whap!
#75907From: Michael GerardNov 4, 1992 7:52 AM
Dave: How about uploading a descriptive file to the library, detailing specs?
#76065From: Dave CinegeNov 4, 1992 11:52 PM
Will do when I get a chance……It looks like there will be no more changes to the board. Everyone who's been following this knows it jumpers from 30Mhz to 36Mhz down to 33Mhz and has waffled between 2 and 3 megs on a stock board….so I will wait just a little bit longer to make sure everything is correct in the text file. Dave Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 – via Whap!
#75946From: Betty Clay/SYSOPNov 4, 1992 12:34 PM
Dave, I know that you've taken quite a few blows here lately, and might not think of this but: We welcome text files for our library that describe a new product. Why not write up one and upload it, telling us all about the specifications and abilities of your 486SLC BB? A formal product announcement is proper for the message base so long as it does not solicit funds to be exchanged. I the library, it is proper to give the suggested list price of the product, and proper to give the address and phone number where people can order or get more information -but it should be informational rather than a wild sales pitch. I'm sure you know the difference. —Betty
#76066From: Dave CinegeNov 4, 1992 11:52 PM
Read mikes reply. Dave Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 – via Whap!
#75979From: Branden BeachyNov 4, 1992 5:41 PM
Dave: You seem to know a little (: about Bridgeboards – what do you recomend as a 386 upgrade for the AT bridgeboard? Or, as I suspect, do you recomend your 486slc bridgeboard? What kind of price difference would there be between the two? Thanks for any info. …Cruising on AutoPilot from Northern Indiana… Branden Beachy 72557,107
#76067From: Dave CinegeNov 4, 1992 11:52 PM
Heres the great thing about us that you can't get with a Gloden Gate. Upgradablity…. If you buy a C= 386 25Mhz now we will be able to upgrade it to a 33Mhz 486 SLC in the future….and the best part is you lose nothing in the upgrade, eveything is compatible (just make sure you put 60ns ram on it) Current upgrade price is $675 an includes 2mb Also if you already own a AT board we sell a 486SLC accelerator for that. It is running at 24Mhz and includes a FPU, Price is $735. We recommend this route only to people who have their boards running smoth and just need more speed. The 386sx/486SLC is the route to go if you have nothing now. Dave Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 – via Whap!
#76142From: Marion J DelandNov 5, 1992 11:30 AM
Branden, In addition to Dave's board (sorry, Dave!) there is the new Golden Gate from Vortex, which is offering an trade-up for Bridgeboard owners (any hardware emulator, actually). Ads will be appearing in December issues. I haven't tested or reviewed it yet…next week is going to be busy. Marion CROSSINGS Newsletter for the Bridgeboard, etc.
#76158From: Dave CinegeNov 5, 1992 4:23 PM
We dump on the Vortex Golden Gate…………they are getting a Norton SI rating of 45…we are getting 71!!!! Dave PS….remember Marion, I need this board back so no falling in love with it. :> Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 – via Whap!
#76582From: Marion J DelandNov 8, 1992 12:50 PM
Dave… That's why I'm testing them—to find out who gets what rates. Sorry I didn't call you back on Friday–I'll try Monday morning. Marion CROSSINGS Newsletter for the Bridgeboard, etc.
#76163From: Art SteinmetzNov 5, 1992 4:45 PM
Is your 486 is the Cyrix 486SLC? If so is it the one with the 1K cache as opposed to Intel's 4k cache? — Art
#76232From: Dave CinegeNov 6, 1992 6:21 AM
Yes….it is not possible to put an Intel(32-bit) chip in a 16-bit machine though. Don't let that fool you…..we are getting speeds just under a true 486-33 486SLC 33Mhz True 486 33 Landmark 2.0 105 115 Norton SI 66 69 (oops 71 was at 36MHz not 33MHz) MIPS 12.5 14 Dave Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 – via Whap!
#76326From: John GagerNov 6, 1992 9:21 PM
Dave: I was wondering if you read the article by Michael Slater in the latest issue of Computer Shopper concerning benchmarks and in particular the Cyrix 486SLC chip. And I quote "One of the most egregious cases of benchmark abuse is now showing up in advertisements for systems using Cyrix's 486SLC." And again, "On real programs, Cyrix claims only 1.4 to 1.6 times the performance of a 386SX". Don't get me wrong, I'm not here to cause you problems but maybe you can shed some light on the 486SLC and whether or not it really does offer a speed advantage. Seems like a 386DX would be faster than the Cyrix chip. John – K7KB (Flying via AutoPilot)
#76392From: Dave CinegeNov 7, 1992 5:11 AM
Yes I read the entire thing….and it was the most unfair review i ever read……be sides that….everything listed in thier is the 25Mhz…we are running at 33Mhz. My personal system is a 386 40 Mhz….and this flys past it Dave Elite MicroComputers 908-541-4214 – via Whap!
#76480From: John GagerNov 7, 1992 9:58 PM
Well it does show that the Landmark & Norton SI Benchmarks should not be used as a basis for comparing the performance of the Intel 486 and Cyrix's 486SLC chip. If the benchmark can fit in the 1K cache of the 486SLC, then it is going to give some nice performance ratings. But in real world applications, the SLC might not be as hot as everyone thinks it is. John – K7KB (Flying via AutoPilot)
#76586From: Marion J DelandNov 8, 1992 1:16 PM
John, The problem is–how do you test something quantifiably in running real world programs if you're not a programmer? You can't just give impressions that "this was noticeably faster than that". Norton and Landmark give us numbers we can compare. I got some testing programs from PCMag, but they tend to measure disk access. I'd like to find a TSR "stopwatch" for the PC side. Anyone know of one? This stuff is a lot easier to do on an Amiga (thanks to multitasking). Marion CROSSINGS Newsletter for the Bridgeboard.
#76648From: John GagerNov 8, 1992 9:01 PM
Yes, but the Norton and Landmark series of benchmarks can be misleading in that they check the raw processing power of the CPU itself, not the complete computer system. Like it said in the article, the BAPCo suite of IBM benchmarks might be a better alternative. It is an application based series of benchmarks that test applications like Word Processors, Spreadsheets, etc. Maybe that might be the better way to go to test new hardware for Crossings. John – K7KB (Flying via AutoPilot)