80386 components/ BIOS summary
Alex Nghiem
id AA04479; Sat, 22 Jul 89 23:35:15 -0500
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 89 23:35:15 -0500
From: nghiem (Alex Nghiem)
Message-Id: <890723043...@vondrake.cc.utexas.edu>
To: axa...@cs.Buffalo.EDU
Subject: Re: 80386 80286 XT components: preliminary summary of responses
Cc: nghiem
Status: R
[inquiry for clarification of responses]
The WD controller is the WD1006VMM2--Two floppys (all form factors)
and two hd's with cache. This controller is designed for
fast 286/386 machines.
I had no responses regarding Microscience. I do know that the
MTBF performance of Seagats drives in now advertised to
be 100,000 hours.
I had no comments regarding Intel manufactured mother boards. They
do make an Inboard 386 and an Inboard/PC 386. I have no use for
the Inboard 386, although many people are happy with them,
and the Inboard/PC 386 will not do for my application
because of the non-standard eight bit data path (bottleneck).
The standard 386 Motherboard seems to be the Micronics 386. They have
several models. They are rather pricy--from 1995 to 2095 depending
on the vendor. There are several vendors in Computer Shopper who
sell Micronics.
As for the other manufacturers, Mylex have nice features, but do
not run Xenix. There are tons of other manufacturers of other
boards. Generally, the ones that sell ultra cheap have some kind of
problems. I have since found that many boards with AMI bios and
shadow bios do not work properly with many 16 bit video and
hard disk controller cards with the shadow enabled.
If you disable the shadow feature, the 384k taken up by the
shadow feature is not free to be used for
VDISK.SYS--you simply lose access to it. Obviously, these boards
do not fit the Lotus/Intel/Microsoft standard for extended memory.
So far, I have not found a cheap board that implements the disabled
shadow feature properly. Right now I am trying to verify from
the manufacturer of a particular board whether or not
the shadow works correctly with the 16 bit bus hardware I use in the
first place. That way, I won't have to worry about whether or not
I will lose 384K.
Problems with BIOS:
I have received comments that the Phoenix 386 bios version 1.10
seems to work properly for most people with almost all software.
However, there are known networking and bios shadowing problems
with the Phoenix Bios that have been resolved with replacement
with an Award BIOS.
Award BIOS version R2 does not run Windows/386. Apparently
Award R3 runs Windows nicely. Award and Quadtel bios (derived from
the Award) seems to run nicely with netware. However, the
Compuadd machine with the Award bios had mediocre test results.
Hauppage Computer Works, on the other hand, uses the Award BIOS
and are considered expensive, but very reliable.
Most of the 386's reviewed by PC Magazine and given Editor's Choice
had the AMI bios. PC Magazine just gave Editor's Choice to
an Everex 386SX machine whose bios is derived from the AMI bios.
Micronics uses the AMI bios. It seems to me that for a 386 machine,
the AMI is the way to go. The problem of determining which low-cost
board will work properly still remains.
When looking for the board, it appears the Chips and Technology
NEAT (New Extended AT) chip set is the standard. If the board uses propriety
discrete logic, be wary of incompatibilites.
I have not determined if the problem of losing 384k when the
shadow ram is disabled is a function of the chip set or not. If
it proves to be a result of the chip set, then the bug will
be "standard" on lot's of clones.
Regarding the Seagate SCSI drives and controllers:
There were some manufacturing problems with some Seagate SCSI HD40's
used by Apple, but I think they were resolved. Apple had a
huge headache with the Quantum SCSI HD40's though. Any problem with
Seagates are small in comparison.
Many people like the ST01/ST02 controller.
They are cheap and fast. There were some problems mentioned with
slow transfer rates with the Seagate controllers, but I
believe that they were resolved with the combination of a BIOS
upgrade and documentation on how to set jumpers on the
controller card for an AT (XT is the default). But, it has been reported
that if the HD fails or is not recognized for any reason, the computer will
not boot from a floppy--it will hang until some one corrects the hard disk
problem or removes the hard disk controller card.
I decided not to go with SCSI because of the lack of diagnostic software
for SCSI drives on the PC--most everything currently written is for MFM
ST-506 formats. I think the same deficiency holds true for EDSI and RLL
formats. Of course, this lack of diagnostic software probably will change
in the future.
Thanks for the feedback. I really appreciate it. Send more!
ngh...@walt.cc.utexas.edu
!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!walt!nghiem
Steven Philip Lin
>. . . .
>Micronics uses the AMI bios. . . .
Micronics does not and has never used the AMI bios. Micronics sells
sells Award version C3.04 and Pheonix Bios Plus 1.10 Revision 10 for their
boards. Hope this clarification helps.
William Cummins
20mhz runs as fast as most that are sold to the genral public ie. not
the boards like compaqu everex ect. uses I'm a dealer for the sunlogic
boards useing the AMI design thay are a 8 layer mb and can hold up to
16 mb the only problem with them is no support for any math co-
processers but the 20mhz 387 my selling price on the boards is alot
less than the asking price for the other boards you have looked at if
your interested call me at Gene-O- Tech at (503)753-9544 william
cummins
--
William Cummins
Domain: William...@bigtime.fidonet.org
UUCP: ...!{tektronix, hplabs!hp-pcd}!orstcs!bigtime!William.Cummins
via Big Time Television (bigtime.fidonet.org, 1:152/201)
Jim Burke
>Micronics does not and has never used the AMI bios. Micronics sells
>sells Award version C3.04 and Pheonix Bios Plus 1.10 Revision 10 for their
>boards. Hope this clarification helps.
For that matter, does any major brand name board maker use the AMI bios?
I don't think you will find it an any major brand name clones that I
know of, at least not Compaq or Everex. Who uses AMI besides the
inexpensive import clone builders?
--
Jim Burke (408) 734-9822 (temp) | I'll stop posting when they pry my
ji...@Atherton.COM | cold, dead fingers from the smoking
{decwrl,sun,hpda,pyramid}!athertn!jimb | keyboard.
Alex Nghiem
1>In article <15...@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> sl...@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Steven Philip Lin) writes:
1>
1>>Micronics does not and has never used the AMI bios. Micronics sells
1>>sells Award version C3.04 and Pheonix Bios Plus 1.10 Revision 10 for their
1>>boards. Hope this clarification helps.
1>
1>For that matter, does any major brand name board maker use the AMI bios?
1>I don't think you will find it an any major brand name clones that I
1>know of, at least not Compaq or Everex. Who uses AMI besides the
^^^^^^^^
1>inexpensive import clone builders?
In the August 1989 issue of PC Magazine, there is a review of
80386SX machines. The only 80386SX in this review to get
Editor's Choice was the Everex. The features tabulation states
that the Everex BIOS is derived from the AMI BIOS. Technically,
it is not an AMI BIOS as the BIOS in the Dell systems is not the
same as the generic Phoenix 386 BIOS 1.10 due to propriety extensions
or revisions.
All of the Everex 80386 machines tested in the May 30, 1989 issue of
PC Magazine had the AMI BIOS. (See p. 269)
It was posted that the Phoenix BIOS had ROM Shadow
problems: however, apparently this problem does not exist with
the Dell systems. On a Dell system, it was posted that if the
ROM Shadow is disabled, the 384k is accessable by VDISK. Dell
also uses the Chips and Technologies chip set. Any problems
other boards have with the loss of 384K to VDISK when the
shadow is disabled may be due to the board itself and not the chip set.
For those who reported that the Phoenix 386 BIOS had netware problems:
The current version is advertised to be NOVELL and NETWARE compatible
by Wholesale Direct. See p. 421, August '89 Computer Shopper.
It should be noted that the goal of PC Magazine Editor's Choice and
the Computer Shopper's Best Buy Awards is to report
the best values for your money. Since AMI BIOS systems are generally
cheaper that their Award or Phoenix counterparts, it should not be
surprising that if the machine does what it is supposed to do it will
end up with an Editor's Choice or Best Buy Award.
In the PC Magazine May 30, 1989 Review of 80386 machines, the
only three systems that got Editors Choice that did not have
an AMI bios were Dell(customized Phoenix), Tandy(customized Phoenix), and
IBM (IBM BIOS, of course!) See the features tabulation on p.272. No Editor's
choice machine had the Award BIOS.
ngh...@walt.cc.utexas.edu
!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!walt!nghiem
Jerry H. Chan
> In article <15...@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> sl...@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Steven Philip Lin) writes:
>
> >Micronics does not and has never used the AMI bios. Micronics sells
> >sells Award version C3.04 and Pheonix Bios Plus 1.10 Revision 10 for their
> >boards. Hope this clarification helps.
>
> For that matter, does any major brand name board maker use the AMI bios?
> I don't think you will find it an any major brand name clones that I
> know of, at least not Compaq or Everex. Who uses AMI besides the
> inexpensive import clone builders?
I use Monolithic Systems Corp. 386 motherboards w/the AMI bios in my
products (UNIX-based office clusters, workstations, desktop-publishing).
Monolithic Systems is an AMERICAN company who got into the PC 386 motherboard
business a couple of years ago; they're better known for their DEC memory
cards / IBM-compatible J-RAM memory expansion cards. They got PC Magazine's
Editor's Choice last year for their 386 motherboard. I've been satisfied
w/the AMI bios.
Their motherboards are a bit more pricey than the available Tawainese clones,
but they provide great product support, i.e., their to-be-released cache-
based boards use the C&T cache controller which does *not* have the cache
coherency problems associated w/the Intel cache controller when running
intelligent cards on the bus (i.e., smart I/O cards). BTW, if you're in
the market for 386 motherboards w/cache, if you intend to use any smart
cards on the bus, be sure that the hardware supports it (special PAL
to disable the cache for I/O regions, or some modifications to the
original Intel cache controller). I believe someone else alluded to
this in his posting a few days ago.
--
Jerry Chan (Voice) 508-853-0747 |"My views necessarily reflect the
Chan Smart!Ware Computer Services & Products | views of the Company because
Worcester, MA 01606 | I *am* the Company." :-)
{bu-cs,husc8,cloud9}!encore!chansw!chan \---------------------------------
Gordon Stewart
My Mylex MI 386 / 20 uses the AMI bios.
--
{apple, pacbell, hplabs, ucbvax}!well!gors
go...@well.sf.ca.us
(Doolan) | (Meyer) | (Sierchio) | (Stewart)
Charles Marslett
> In article <74...@athertn.Atherton.COM>, ji...@athertn.Atherton.COM (Jim Burke) writes:
> > For that matter, does any major brand name board maker use the AMI bios?
> > I don't think you will find it an any major brand name clones that I
> > know of, at least not Compaq or Everex. Who uses AMI besides the
> > inexpensive import clone builders?
Everex uses AMI -- at least on their Step 20 386 box. Except of the problems
with ROM resident setup code (which AMI shares with the other BIOS vendors
who provide that nice option), the AMI BIOS does seem to be at least as good
as the Phoenix 286 BIOS and Compaq's 386 BIOS.
> Jerry Chan (Voice) 508-853-0747 |"My views necessarily reflect the
> Chan Smart!Ware Computer Services & Products | views of the Company because
> Worcester, MA 01606 | I *am* the Company." :-)
> {bu-cs,husc8,cloud9}!encore!chansw!chan \---------------------------------
Charles Marslett
ch...@attctc.dallas.tx.us
Chief BIOS guru for STB Systems, Inc <-- apply all standard disclaimers
Mitsuharu Hadeishi
I have recently purchased an AMAX 386/20 with AMI BIOS, Neat chip set,
and up to 8mb on the motherboard (with 1 mbit DRAMs) and up to 16mb total RAM
(using their one 32-bit slot). It is a very inexpensive, high quality clone
(oh yes, zero wait state, no cache, though a cache card as an option will be
available "in a month" to plug into the 32-bit slot). I've so far had no
problems with the AMI BIOS, though it does in fact require the entire 64K of
ROM to operate properly (some BIOSes, in particular Award BIOS, can function
even if you convert up to about the bottom 32K of the ROM to RAM using a 386
memory manager, believe it or not!). Performance is not too hot, but hey, I'm
not going to quibble over 10% speed difference (it is about the same as other
386 clones, that is to say about 20% slower than an Everex Step 386/20, SI 21.0
as opposed to SI 24.3). Overall I'm VERY happy with the price/performance; I
could have spent more on an Everex, but then I could have spent about the same
amount more and got a 25Mhz machine with superior performance to the Step 20.
I've had innumerable problems with an Advent 386/16 I used to use
at work with Award BIOS and many of my coworkers also had such problems (many
of which went away when some of them switched to Phoenix.) These problems
included crashing when accessing the floppy drive under Desqview, intermittent
unpredictable crashes, etc. No such problems on my current machine (I've
tried to reproduce a few).
Rick Wagner
>> I don't think you will find it an any major brand name clones that I
>> know of, at least not Compaq or Everex. Who uses AMI besides the
>> inexpensive import clone builders?
>
I missed the earlier parts of this discussion (flakey news feed!), is
AMI the same as American Megatrends Inc.? I have an Everex "OEM"
system, which uses this BIOS. I have found no compatability problems
in DOS or SCO Xenix; I haven't tried OS/2 (hopefully I never will). The "OEM" system is a lower cost system Everex builds and OEMs to companies to put their own name on. Works well for me.
--
===============================================================================
Rick Wagner Network Research Corp.
ri...@nrc.com ri...@nrcvax.UUCP 2380 North Rose Ave.
(805) 485-2700 FAX: (805) 485-8204 Oxnard, CA 93030
Don't hate yourself in the morning, sleep 'till noon.