----- Original Message -----
From: Gerardo Medrano <[log in to unmask]>


> "Jose E. Dominguez" wrote:
>
> > Gerardo Medrano wrote:
> >
> > > Dave Gillett wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 29 Jun 99, at 11:33, Mike Curtis wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I am looking for a modem recommendation for a 486DX4 100.  It
can be either
> > > > > ISA or PCI.
> > > >
> > > >   Because a 486 lacks the "horsepower" for a WinModem, I'd steer
away from
> > >
> > > Is it this "lack of horsepower" because Winmodem use software
resources instead
> > > of hardware (CPU) resources?
> >
> > Not exactly. The software modem uses the CPU to do it's processes,
>
> This is  a basic I/O routine initialized by the software (drivers)


Which uses the CPU (hardware) to perform that function and there is a lot
more happening.  The high speed of a 56K modem is not achieved through
faster baud rate, but through data compression routines.  Because the data
is compressed (by calculations performed by the CPU), the modem can
transmit the information at the same speed that a "true" 56K modem would
use -- if there were such an thing.


>
> > and must run in
> > Windows. The hardware modem does the processing itself
>
> By divine decree?


No, by manufacturer's desgn.  The bundled software (data compression
routines) for the modem will only work in the Windows environment -- which
is why it is called a WINmodem.

I suppose you could write your own software application so that the modem
would function in DOS or Unix, but it would only function as a 28.8 modem
without the high speed compression routines that the modem on the OTHER
END of the circuit requires.


> I understand that the hardware modem uses the registries ( 1 sort of
> memory) of the CPU
>
> > and can run in DOS since it
> > does not rely on Windows.
> >
> > > If it is; maybe he needs a CPU upgrade for better
> > > performance.
> >
> > A 486DX100 can't be upgraded to anything else, maybe a AMD 586-133MHz
if the board
> > supports it. All he really needs is a hardware modem.
>
> This is the point that I was trying to convey. I agree that if he could
upgrade with
> the AMD; he could *improve* the performance.
>

I don't think that is the point at all.  It doesn't matter whether you
look at this from the software side or the hardware side.  Anything below
a Pentium 133 will perform so poorly that it would be almost useless
because the processor does not have enough power to perform the needed
functions in a timely manner AND run the rest of the system.

This is why most Winmodem manufacturers recommend a Pentium 133 or higher.

         The PCBUILD web site always needs good submissions.  If
          you would like to contribute to the website, send any
               hardware tech tips or hardware reviews to:
                           [log in to unmask]