Search the FAQ Archives

3 - A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - I - J - K - L - M
N - O - P - Q - R - S - T - U - V - W - X - Y - Z - Internet FAQ Archives

Win95 FAQ Part 14 of 14: Misc
Section - 14.9. I want to get a Pentium Pro (TM) system, but isn't it slower running Win95 than a Pentium?

( Part1 - Part2 - Part3 - Part4 - Part5 - Part6 - Part7 - Part8 - Part9 - Part10 - Part11 - Part12 - Part13 - Part14 - Single Page )
[ Usenet FAQs | Web FAQs | Documents | RFC Index | Cities ]

Top Document: Win95 FAQ Part 14 of 14: Misc
Previous Document: 14.8. Why didn't Novell/WordPerfect/Corel (TM) release a 32-bit version of PerfectOffice (TM) yet?
Next Document: 14.10. Top ten reasons why Microsoft created Windows 95
See reader questions & answers on this topic! - Help others by sharing your knowledge
   I don't have the details on this, but the noise out there suggests a
   Pentium Pro runs 16 bit code slower than a Pentium does. Intel's
   optimized the 'Pro for 32-bit code, just like Microsoft's pushing
   32-bit apps for the "Designed for Win95" logo. This is another sign
   that these two giants are trying to kill DOS.
   Yes, the 'Pro will run Win95's 16 bit components slower than a Pentium
   can. According to KB article Q122869, these components use 16-bit
     * Disk utilities (ScanDisk, Defrag, DriveSpace 2)
     * Games (The built in time-wasters, even Freecell is a 16-bit
       version here)
     * Win 3.1 compatibility stubs (like KRNL386, USER, GDI, all the .DRV
     * Win 3.1 components (WinChat, SYSEDIT, Program Manager, File
       Manager, WinVer)
     * The Win95 tour
     * DOS programs and COMMAND.COM, and the start up code which uses DOS
   If you use only Win32 programs, you won't touch the 16-bit code once
   Win95 is up. If you avoid DOS programs you won't use DOS for any
   hardware access.
   Yes it's slower than a Pentium for old crap, but it's faster than a
   Pentium for the new crap.

User Contributions:

Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic: