home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!sgigate!odin!mips!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!pacbell.com!tandem!kevinz@storage.tandem.com
- From: kevinz@storage.tandem.com (Kevin Ziegler)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
- Subject: Re: Where did my 45% go? (DOS app performance)
- Message-ID: <1992Aug13.213405.17019@tandem.com>
- Date: 13 Aug 92 21:34:05 GMT
- References: <1992Aug13.202130.15906@tandem.com>
- Sender: news@tandem.com
- Distribution: usa
- Organization: Tandem Computers Inc.
- Lines: 19
- Nntp-Posting-Host: rutabaga.storage.tandem.com
-
- In article <1992Aug13.202130.15906@tandem.com>, kevinz@storage.tandem.com (Kevin Ziegler) writes:
- >
- > I put OS/2 on my no-name 486/33 box last week. The installation worked
- > smoothly, and I haven't experienced any problems running my applications.
- > However, all of my compute-intensive DOS applications are only running at
- > 50% native DOS speed when launched in a full-size screen under OS/2. The
- > latest OS/2 FAQ says to expect 95-97% native DOS speed from a single DOS
- > application running full-screen under OS/2. Does anyone have any ideas
- > where the other 45% of performance went?
- >
- > A little more info: I only have 5 MB of RAM, but the problem does not seem
- > to be related to disk swapping; I have watched the disk drive light while
- > the programs are running and the hard disk is not being accessed. I have
- > AMI BIOS dated 6/6/91; I've heard of problems with OS/2 and AMI BIOS but
- > these don't seem to be performance-related problems. Any help from you OS/2
- > gurus out there would be much appreciated.
- >
- I should add that I have spent hours tweaking the DOS settings available
- without experiencing any performance increase.
-