SPONSORED LINKS
Tiso is correct, 701 IS a lovely machine and David is correct that for many or most functions its 486/100 does just fine (Sorry INTEL). While I look and wait for a cd capable pentium tp I still marvel at this jewel. The weight, size and display are great and keyboard still gets the girls attention... The silence from the upgrade companies is deafening. Has NOBODY actually upgraded? Maybe they should offer a special deal for someone to take the upgrade (first upgrade?) and report on it. Presumably IBM would not void warranty on other aspects of a machine (screen, hinges etc that we hear about) if the chip is replaced...but I'd want to ask them. Bryan At 09:23 AM 5/22/97 HST, you wrote: >Tiso wrote: >> >> NOT even close ...RE: p75 performance >> The 701 is/was a lovely machine but SLOW. >> I don't have one; but all benchmarks I have seen >> (mainly PC Mag which tend to be the only meaningfull ones ..sigh) >> indicated poor performance for it's class. > >(1) In defense of the 701, it has good disk and video performance for a >486; my day-to-day work isn't all that much faster on my P133 machines. >(Perhaps the PC Mag bmarks had the machine in one of the power >conservation modes.) > >(2) As for the projected speedup with the AMD chip, when I changed my >desktop 486DX2-66 to the AMD586-133 I expected only a marginal increase, >and was pleasantly surprised to see substantial real-world improvement >(see the doc I posted at my website, www.math.hawaii.edu/~ross/cpu). >Not quite P75, but suprisingly good. However, I personally wouldn't pay >$400 for this amount of speedup. > >> NO 2nd level cache much less write back. > >The AMD *does* have a write-back cache (though some system boards don't >let you enable this). > >- David > >