Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!nike!ucbcad!ucbvax!decvax!mcnc!ecsvax!ranger
From: ranger@ecsvax.UUCP (Rick N. Fincher)
Newsgroups: net.micro.apple
Subject: Re: C128 vs Apple //e
Message-ID: <2108@ecsvax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 8-Oct-86 16:43:30 EDT
Article-I.D.: ecsvax.2108
Posted: Wed Oct  8 16:43:30 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 10-Oct-86 00:11:56 EDT
References: <9800030@uiucuxa> <2084@ecsvax.UUCP> <293@husc6.HARVARD.EDU>
Organization: UNC Educational Computing Service
Lines: 23

> In article <2084@ecsvax.UUCP> ranger@ecsvax.UUCP (Rick N. Fincher) writes:
> >> 
> 
> isn't it true that although the // series microprocessor runs at 1mhz, the
> computer runs at an apparent speed of 0.5mhz because of the video/computer
> division of time..
> 
> Somehow, I don't really think the microprocessor spped is quite as important
> as the apparent or visible speed... Here, the Apple, usually through 
> excellent programming, makes up much ground on the PC series..  
> Anyone else out there feel the same?
> 
> Paul Nakada

Paul, memory refresh and video sharing does slow down the system from
its full clock speed, but it doesn't cut it in half.  I vaguely remember
the ratio being 1 cycle in 50 or 60 being stretched.  You may be thinkin    -
ng of the read cycles vs the write cycles, each only gets control of
the bus for half the time.  I agree, clock speed is not the only or
even the best benchmark of performance.  Even the best machine in the world           
world is useless without good software. 

Rick