Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!rex!ukma!dftsrv!mimsy!midway!quads.uchicago.edu!jcav From: jcav@quads.uchicago.edu (john cavallino) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware Subject: Re: Comparing the Mac+ and SE Message-ID: <1991Apr25.172530.12269@midway.uchicago.edu> Date: 25 Apr 91 17:25:30 GMT References: <764@newave.UUCP> <1068@eplunix.UUCP> Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (NewsMistress) Organization: University of Chicago Lines: 27 In article <1068@eplunix.UUCP> das@eplunix.UUCP (David Steffens) writes: >In article <764@newave.UUCP>, john@newave.UUCP (John A. Weeks III) says: >> But for all practical difference, there is no real speed difference between >> the Mac + and the SE. At least not a difference worth nit picking about. > >Wrong. The SE has more of QuickDraw in ROM. Code in ROM executes >twice as fast as code in RAM because the video refresh uses every >other RAM cycle. Therefore, a benchmark which does lots of QuickDraw >calls _will_ show a speed difference favoring the SE over the Plus >by about 30-50% depending on the exact mix. This will also be noticeable >to the user when running programs which do a lot of QuickDraw operations. That's all well and good, but there are some hardware differences that make the SE noticably (to me) more comfortable to work with. The most important of these is the speed of the SCSI interface. The SE will talk to hard disks etc. well over twice as fast as the Plus. This is VERY important. The other difference is in how many memory access cycles are stolen to refresh the video display. The SE wastes 30% less time this way than does the Plus, which leads to about a 15% speed increase. I think these differences, especially the SCSI speed, are more than nit-picky. -- John Cavallino | EMail: jcav@midway.uchicago.edu University of Chicago Hospitals | USMail: 5841 S. Maryland Ave, Box 145 Office of Facilities Management | Chicago, IL 60637 B0 f++ w c+ g+ k s(+) e+ h- pv | Telephone: 312-702-6900