Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site bgsuvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!osu-eddie!bgsuvax!ritzenth
From: ritzenth@bgsuvax.UUCP (ritzenth)
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Re: Z-100 blows away IBM-AT
Message-ID: <463@bgsuvax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 24-May-85 00:18:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: bgsuvax.463
Posted: Fri May 24 00:18:14 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 25-May-85 07:21:58 EDT
References: <10708@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Organization: Bowling Green State University, OH
Lines: 80



After this short review, I've got to put my 2 cents worth in . . .


GUBBINS@RADC-TOPS20.ARPA (Gern) wrote:


>Using a standard BASIC benchmark, the Z-100 (8/16-bit 8088) blows
>away an IBM-AT (16-bit 80286 at 6 MHz).
>
>the progam:
>
>5 TIME$="00:00:00"
>10 FOR X=1 TO 10000
>20 IF SQR(X)<>INT(SQR(X)) THEN 40
>30 PRINT SQR(X),
>40 NEXT X
>45 PRINT TIME$
>50 END
>
>NOTE:  This program also is an accuracy test, the correct results are
>the numbers from 1 to 100.  The TRS-80, Apple, HP, C64 can't do it
>right (they miss about 20 numbers).
>
>The time for the 6 MHz IBM-AT is 1 min, 13 sec
>
>The time for the standard 5 MHz Z-100 is 1 min, 13 sec
>
>The time for a turboed 7.37 MHz Z-100 is 49 sec
>
>The time for the newly released 8MHz Z-100 would be better still.
>
>The Z-100 is faster, can do better color graphics, has a real keyboard,
>has a second 8-bit CPU for CP/M and is less than half the price of the
>IBM-AT.   The cost of being better is not being competely IBM compatible.
>
>Cheers,
>Gern



O.K. You've spent the time to read the above, now for my 2 cents . . . 
I've been chided here for buying a not-so-IBM-Compatible, Sanyo 555-2.

I've upgraded it so that it would be a little more compatible, adding the
256K and installing the new Video Board (VB).  They now say that it is
approx. 80% compatible.  SO . . . how does it really compare to the
IBM-PC?

COMPUTER       VERSION               OUTPUT DIRECTED TO            TIME
========       =======               ==================            ====
IBM-PC         256K                       screen                   3:19

Sanyo          STANDARD                   screen                   4:37
               with Sanyo Basic

Sanyo          VIDEO BOARD                screen                   1:44
               with GW-Basic

Sanyo          VIDEO BOARD                printer                  1:40
               with GW-Basic


Can anyone out there in net-land explain these results?  How can a machine
that is running on the same CPU, a supposedly slower clock, and approximately
the same basic (at least all of the commands are the same) run twice as
fast as it's competitor?  The only difference between the 2 Sanyos is the
Video Board (similar to the IBM PC video board).

Also, why did the program run faster when the output was directed to the
printer?  When I studied operating systems, we were taught that the printer
was the slowest of the output devices.

Oh, yes, on BOTH machines, all 100 numbers were listed!

THANKS

Phil Ritzenthaler
cbosgd!osu-eddie!bgsuvax!ritzenth