Nice Find

<>It's warped. It's a 386/16 and that's all. <Yeah, but with extra RAM, etc. it could very well benchmark as a higher o <lower MHz, even with today's Winbench's. Lower mhz yes faster never. Faster means a timer error or the program is broken. The 386 implmentation on that card is very vanilla and no cache. Besides it's checkes out on mine at 16 using norton, QAFE+ and a few others. <Linux won't run XF86 even in mono mode with less than 8MB RAM, which make <zero sense because any PC that shipped with 8MB RAM and a mono card was Whatever you do don't tell my 386sx/33 that! It might stop working. < There are several projects going on to have Linux run on 286 and lowe <machines, and, of course, lowering RAM consumption. There's an 8MB <distribution that only requires 512K (I believe) RAM, if you give it enou <swap space (in that case, it would be 3.5MB) Look up ELKS. <>Windows 3.1 does run on it with the 1meg. <It'll run, but in my experience, Windows 3.1 doesn't do to much with it. <friends 286 (they were still using it last summer when they moved, but i <was retrofit with MY 210MB HDD, and a SVGA monitor and graphics card) Yo <can't extract files, run most software that was designed for Windows 3.1 Runs good and most software that will fit in 1meg runs ok. Swapping is heavy though so a fast disk helps. 3.0 is ok but it will not run some apps at all! <I'd go with 3.0, if I had a choice. If I was you, I would just upgrade t <DOS 5.0 or so. It'll run loads of software, and is more consistent with I'm running 6.22 and LW had 5.x on his. <hardware that you have, minus the 386CPU. And, it's smaller, so you coul <actually have more software on it. Come to think of it, I believe that <Windows 3.1 is like 25MB, plus the DOS 5.0 that's required to run it, whi <fits on 5 720K floppies, I believe. Huh? I had 6.22, win3.1, procomm+, and a few other things and had about 4.5mb free on a 20mb drive. DO5.0 would reduce it some but not alot, 3.3 would be far smaller and still run w3.1. Allison