Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
| blog:386_shootout_fic [2021/05/17 08:49] – [Results] john | blog:386_shootout_fic [2021/05/17 20:12] (current) – [Final Thoughts] john | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 182: | Line 182: | ||
| {{: | {{: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Case Setup ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{: | ||
| ===== Speed Testing & Tuning ===== | ===== Speed Testing & Tuning ===== | ||
| Line 461: | Line 465: | ||
| | Wolfenstein 3D (FPS) | 29.3 | 31.7 | 34.7 | 36.3 | 39.2 | 40.3 | 40.0 | 40.7 | 40.9 | | | Wolfenstein 3D (FPS) | 29.3 | 31.7 | 34.7 | 36.3 | 39.2 | 40.3 | 40.0 | 40.7 | 40.9 | | ||
| | F1GP Bench 1 (CPU %) | 59-64 | 56-62 | 48-51 | 40-43 | 37-40 | 37-40 | | 37-40 | 37-40 | | | F1GP Bench 1 (CPU %) | 59-64 | 56-62 | 48-51 | 40-43 | 37-40 | 37-40 | | 37-40 | 37-40 | | ||
| - | | Doom timedemo 3 (low detail) |            | + | | Doom timedemo 3 (low detail) | 2298 / 32.5fps  | 
| - | | Doom timedemo 3 (high detail)|  | + | | Doom timedemo 3 (high detail)|  | 
| - | | PC Player benchmark  | + | | PC Player benchmark  | 
| ---- | ---- | ||
| Line 486: | Line 490: | ||
| ===== Conclusion ===== | ===== Conclusion ===== | ||
| - | {{: | + | === CPU === | 
| + | |||
| + | Synthetic CPU/FPU scores from Landmark: | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{: | ||
| + | |||
| + | Dhrystone and Whetstone integer and floating point metrics from CheckIt: | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{: | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Disk IO === | ||
| + | |||
| + | HDD transfer speed ratings from CheckIt: | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{: | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Memory & Cache === | ||
| + | |||
| + | Results for CPU cache, motherboard cache and main memory throughput from Comptest: | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{: | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Gaming === | ||
| + | |||
| + | Results from Wolfenstein 3D //special benchmark version//, as well as 3DBench: | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{: | ||
| + | |||
| + | Results from the //Doom -timedemo 3// game benchmark: | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{: | ||
| + | |||
| + | Combined results of all gaming benchmarks: | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Final Thoughts ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Testing proves that the Cirrus Logic card is **as-fast-as** or **faster-than** the Tseng Labs ET4000AX in every real-world benchmark. That's no surprise as it's a much later design. | ||
| + |    * The Am386DX-40 really doesn' | ||
| + | * The Tx486DLC-40 going from cpu cache-disabled to the default cpu cache-enabled setting results in a **12%** improvement in Doom low-detail frame rates and **13%** in high-detail. | ||
| + | * The Tx486DLC-40 going from cpu cache-disabled to the most optimised cache-enabled setting results in a **17%** improvement in Doom low-detail frame rates and **a staggering 35%** improvement at high-detail. | ||
| + |    * Boosting the ISA clock from 10MHz to 13MHz with the DLC brings just a **1%** improvement to Doom low-detail frame rates (to be expected, since we're not pushing many pixels!) but more than **6%** in high-detail. In certain benchmarks this is noticeable, but in the real world many ISA cards would be way out-of-spec at such a setting; in that case the 10MHz ISA clock is a good, stable increase over the ISA ' | ||
| + |    * From non-optimised cache-enabled settings to most-optimised shows gains over just under **5%** in low-detail modes and **19%** in high-detail Doom timedemo results. //Who wouldn' | ||
| - | {{:blog:386: | + | This is a really nice 386DX board - it has plenty of expansion slots, supports up to 256KB of cache, and natively detects and supports the DLC-series of 386-486 processors from Cyrix and Texas Instruments. To get the best performance from the DLC processors you really must use the // | 
| - | {{: | + | With the MR BIOS ROM fitted there are a good range of optimisation settings available and it performs well (very well, in fact) at virtually every setting. At the most-optimised settings with the 486DLC-40 and a Cirrus Logic GD5428 it equals the best recorded scores for other DLC-supporting  | 
| - | {{:blog:386: | + | For folks who had a 386 originally, the upgrade path of this board to the DLC processors would have been very, very tempting. | 
| - | {{:blog:386: | + | At some point I would like to try to find a Tx486SXL-40 or Tx486SXL2-50, | 
| (Go back to the [[blog: | (Go back to the [[blog: | ||