Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!uokmax!cbdougla From: cbdougla@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Collin Broad Douglas) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: Accrete Message-ID: <1990Dec3.004457.5239@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu> Date: 3 Dec 90 00:44:57 GMT References: <6023@crash.cts.com> <13434@chaph.usc.edu> Sender: cbdougla@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK Lines: 36 In article <13434@chaph.usc.edu> dpalermo@aludra.usc.edu (Dan Palermo) writes: >In article bill@pro-gateway.cts.com (Bill Long, SysOp) writes: >>>> I'm surprised it takes so long on a //c I'm running it on my GS, and it >>>>takes about 30 minutes on average per simulation. This is at the standard >>>>2.8 MHz clock speed. From that figure, a 1-MHz machine should finish it in >>>>about 90 minutes or so. >> >>Yep, 30 mins sounds about right for my GS. I also ran it on a IIe >>(unenhanced, unaccelerated) and it took about 1:30. Sounds good to me... >> > > Just for kicks I ran Accrete on an 8MHz "Zipped" //c and it finished >in just under 30 minutes. Maybe this Accrete could be a new Apple // >benchmark for accelerator comparisons - intesive memory/loop/comparison/ >integer and floating-point operations with very little I/O. Anyone run >this on a //gs with one of those Zip GSXs? > > Dan Palermo > dpalermo@usc.edu Well, seeing this message, I ran it on my GS with a Transwarp GS. also, to make it go as fast as possible, I put the program in and wrote the output to the a RAM drive. I ran the program twice. Both times it was under 10 minutes (I forgot to time the first one very exactly) but the second one was around 8:35. I'm sure the RAM drive helped a little here. After all, the output came to be 4 single spaced pages when I printed it out. -- Collin Douglas | "We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt | and uncertainty." cbdougla@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu | America Online: CollinD | -Douglas Adams from Hitchhiker's Guide