AT VS 3B1

[Clarence Dold]

in article <4825 at macom1.UUCP>, larry at macom1.UUCP (Larry Taborek) says:

>> Which is better, an AT&T 3B1 or a PC/AT clone?

> I'd take the PC/AT clone.  Today, PC/AT clones can include 386
> machines.  With 386 PC's, you get a 3B1's 32 bit, you can get
Certainly, comparing a circa 1984 68010 based machine against a 386 clone is
at best impolite.

> I have been looking through the AIM Benchmark Reports and they
> rate a AT&T 3B2/400 (considerably more powerfull then the 3B1) at
> 76% of a VAX 780, and able to run 9 users.  They in turn rate a 
> probably get a 16MZ PC/AT/386 clone for about $1000.00.  By the
I recall that the 3B1 was rated at .7 VAX 750.

The truth of the matter is that it comes down to money.
If it is someone else's money, or if you have to justify it on a purely
performance standpoint, buy the PC!
The 3B1 will not be as fast, nor as software compatible, as the PC
(Speaking binarily.  Source compatability is good on the 3B1).

> It's MY belief that a 386 machine is a much better buy then a
> 3B1, and if you pick up a magazine like Computer-Shopper you can
> probably get a 16MZ PC/AT/386 clone for about $1000.00.  By the

$1000 for a 386 AT?   Sure buddy.
The 3B1 will come with ~1Meg of RAM, a bit-mapped graphics monitor,
a 1200 baud autodial modem, ~20 Meg of disk, and
ALL OF THE SOFTWARE!!!!!!!!!!!

You'll pay more than the cost of the 3B1 for a Development set of 
386 UNIX on the PC clone.

Again, It's a matter of $.  I would rather have the PC.

-- 
---
Clarence A Dold - dold at tsmiti.Convergent.COM		(408) 434-5293
		...pyramid!ctnews!tsmiti!dold
		P.O.Box 6685, San Jose, CA 95150-6685	MS#10-007