Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!brl-tgr!tgr!GUBBINS@RADC-TOPS20.ARPA
From: GUBBINS@RADC-TOPS20.ARPA (Gern)
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Z-100 vs IBM-PC Challenge
Message-ID: <10741@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 16-May-85 13:53:28 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.10741
Posted: Thu May 16 13:53:28 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 17-May-85 05:56:39 EDT
Sender: news@brl-tgr.ARPA
Lines: 34


Okay, I propose this:

Since neither the IBM-AT or Z-100 come with a math coprocessor as a standard
feature (both are options), and mostly because I don't have easy access
to a Z-100 that does have one, that the benchmark(s) not use the 
coprocessor support (8087/80287).

The benchmark(s) must be the same identical code or be generated
from the same compiler under PC/Z/MS-DOS.  I recommend that MS-FORTRAN
be used as both the IBM and Zenith packages will work on each other's
systems.   I do not know about the linkers.

That the benchmarks do not use any disk or I/O, or a separate
disk access benchmark be used (the formats/sizes/track access times/
etc, may be different and dependent only on which vendor was stuck in 
the production line at the time).  I'm not worried, as I have just been
told that the Z-100 again blows the AT away in this area also.

That each machine be functioning in the fastest manufacter's supported
mode.  The Z-100 at 8MHz and the IBM-AT at 6MHz.  I will even run
mine at 6MHz if you want things to be more fair in this area. 

That the benchmarks do not use grahic output as you can't even come
close to the maximum 640x512x8 colors supported by ZDS on the Z-100.

That this challege is taken in the spirit of friendly fun, the quest
for knowledge, and no cheating allowed.

Any modifications?

Cheers,
Gern
-------