From: alyssa@bu.edu (Alyssa Homan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: SUMMARY: 32Bit vs. 16Bit
Date: 15 Nov 92 20:04:17 GMT
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Summary of replies re: post on 16Bit vs. 32Bit (SX vs. DX)
===========================================================================
 
Here is the  situation:
 
       A friend of mine wants to buy a laptop (almost immediately).  His two
advisors (Myself and another friend) have helped him locate two likely systems.
 
My choice: 386DX-33 w/80MB hard drive, 4MB RAM external ports for mouse, KB,
          serial/parallel and internal floppy.  9600 external fax/modem
          (chosen over the twice-as-expensive internal model).
          Price: his limit.
 
Other Advisor's choice: 386sx-25 with all same features as above, except has
          9600 internal fax/modem.
          Price: $300 less than above.
 
Arguments
=========
Me: For that amount of money, buyer will have machine for at least 2-3 years.
    Therefore, get the extra computing power, so that he doesn't choke in
    near future.  His requirements are programming/compiling, spreadsheet
    crunching, some graphics and he hopes to run windows.
 
Not Me: There is not that much difference between "sx" and "DX" anyways (His
   initial claim was that an "sx" was better!!!), that he wouldn't notice any
   difference.
 
My friend - the purchaser-to-be, is not sure which way to go on this.  He
   would like to save some bucks, but wants a good (best?) machine for his
   money.  He also does not understand (or keep up with) all the technical
   stuff.
 
I would like people to give their views on the merits/shortfalls of the two
choices.  Since we do not have much time, and only I (of the three) read the
"net", please mail responses to us both and I will summarize replies to n-group.
Thanks much.   And not too techie, but not too simple.
 
===============================================================================
 
From: szymon@uci.agh.edu.pl (Szymon Sokol)
 
DX-33 is over twice as fast as SX-25... But do what you want ;-)
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: $dougn@sasb.byu.edu (Douglas R. Nebeker - MIS_SAS)
 
Programs as I/O intensive as compiling and graphics should run quite a bit 
better with a 32 bit databus (and of course, everything else will run 
better).  Also, and this isn't totally verified, but I've seen problems with 
Windows 3.0 running in 386 enhanced mode on an SX.  If your friend is going 
to spend the money anyway, why get a 'watered down' SX?!?  He might as well 
buy a 286 with one of those 386sx upgrade boards...
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
From: "Marc E. Munoz-\"Ren\" " <mem28103@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu>
 
The DX will be faster by far.  It's 32 bit bus can move twice as much as
the SX's 16 bit bus.  In addition, the extra clock cycles from the 33MHz
vs the 25MHz will speed up things (if both were DX's the 33 would be ~40%
faster than the 25, more since the 25 is an SX).
 
But, the fact that the DX has a higher clock speed (power savers off) and
more support chips may reduce the battery life during use compared to the
SX (i.e. less work time on the DX than the SX on a single charge).  But all
of this may not matter if the notebook has good power saving schemes (e.g.
hard drive shutdown during non-use, sleep/resume function, etc.)
 
Hope it helps!
 
Marc E. Munoz
mem28103@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
From: FWR100@PSUVM.PSU.EDU
 
Go for the DX-33.  It will be much faster for 2 reasons -
    1.)  33MHz vs. 25MHz clock speed.  About 1/3 faster right there.
    2.)  32 bit vs. 16bit bus.  To make a long story short - the 386 works
         on 32 bits of data at a time.  With a 32 bit bus (DX) it takes one
         clock cycle to read/write this to memory.  With a 16 bit bus (SX),
         it takes 2 clock cycles to do the same thing.  This does _not_
         mean that the DX is twice as fast, but the difference is significant,
         especially for memory intensive applications.
 
I would check the battery life and system weight, if these are important.  The
SX runs slower and should use less power.  Also, the low voltage SX's stretch
battery life.  Excluding that, the DX is worth the extra money
 
-Frank
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
From: thack@antares.Tymnet.COM (Tom Hackwood)
 
I saw your post, and so here is my input.  I am currently purchasing
a 50 Mhz 486 DX machine, and spent some time looking at laptops.  My
current machine is a 16 Mhz 386 SX.  My comments can be found through-
out this letter.  
 
Good luck, and I hope you are happy with whatever you purchase.
 
Tom
 
<Re: modems:>
Go internal if you can, or get a pocket modem.  Laptop=Portable.  External
modems are a pain to lug around.  Fax capability generally adds about
$20 to the cost of a modem.  Think about why the modem is needed, and how
long the sessions are going to last.  For interactive sessions, 2400 BPS
is fine.  For file transfers, 9.6 is the way to go.  By getting a 2.4/9.6
modem/fax (fax is still at 9600), you can save about $100-$200).  The
level of support is something to think of.  Cheap modems don't have much
in the way of manufacturer or documentation support.  You are on your own.
 
 
For Windows, you need the full bus that a DX offers.  The rest can be done
with just a normal SX chip. (more on this later)
 
>
>Not Me: There is not that much difference between "sx" and "DX" anyways (His 
>   initial claim was that an "sx" was better!!!), that he wouldn't notice any
>   difference.  
 
WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!  A "SX" chip can only process data 16 bits at a time.
A "DX" chip can process data 32 bits at a time.  For all practical purposes,
a "DX" based machine will be almost twice as fast as a "SX" machine.
 
----
He should review why he is thinking of a laptop.  Laptops cost $$ in
comparison to a desktop system, and are not upgradeable (new monitors,
video cards, sound, bigger hard disks, etc.)
 
If performance is an issue, he should think about 8 meg of memory,
(4 meg street price is $120 bucks, double for 8 meg.  Prices are for
San Jose/Silicon Valley) to prevent a lot of excess disk access.
 
Another thing to think about is the hard disk.  Eighty meg is barely
enough.  My old machine had 80 meg.  It was full with Borland C++,
Windows, JustWrite (word processor for Windows), Quattro, DOS 5, and
about 10 meg of other junk such as games).
 
Don't forget the printer you will need.  Don't forget to purchase the 
software you need.  You also will need to buy several boxes of floppies
for backup. 
 
Figure to add the following costs:  
        Printer & paper: $200 (low end)
Software (DOS & Windows already installed), all prices based upon
swap meet prices, so store prices will be 30-50% higher):
        Compiler (C, Pascal): $100
        Word processor: $160  
        Spreadsheet: $250
 
I don't mean to scare anyone here, but before anyone leaps to purchase
a PC, the added costs must be considered.  My gut feeling is that the 
total cost is going to be about $2700+ ($2000 without the printer, etc.)
 
Pick up a copy of Computer Shopper, PC Magazine, Info World, or similar
mag.  Go to the library.  Do some real research, and look before you 
jump.
 
One last thing.  Rare is a place that can hand you a box, and say,
"Here!  And come back again!"  Many places will have a "burn-in"
period of 48-72 hrs before you can pick the computer up.  If you
demand immediate pickup, you most likely will forfit ANY warrenty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Thanks much for the input.
The final verdict - He decided that he didn't NEED a laptop, so bought
a 486/25 DX for about $1700.  He feels satisfied, so everything is fine.
 
Gerry George