Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!rutgers!caip!think!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!mcnc!ecsvax!ranger
From: ranger@ecsvax.UUCP (Rick N. Fincher)
Newsgroups: net.micro.apple
Subject: Re: Re: C128 vs Apple //e
Message-ID: <2114@ecsvax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 9-Oct-86 12:10:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: ecsvax.2114
Posted: Thu Oct  9 12:10:16 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 11-Oct-86 19:32:30 EDT
References: <2084@ecsvax.UUCP> <842@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP>
Organization: UNC Educational Computing Service
Lines: 28

> 
> Can you get a 4.08 MHz accelerator for the Apple (which is what you'd need 
> for twice the speed of the C128)?  Last I heard no one's delivering 6502s in
> production quantity that are speced to run above 3MHz.
Most accelerators for the Apple // run at 3.6 mhz because it is a di     n
even division of the 14mhz system clock.  The 65C02 used is actually
a 4mhz chip (available from Rockwell, GTE or WDC).  I think that the
Western Design Center is getting production yields on 6mhz 65802's
which are pin compatible with the 65C02 and 65816's which are used
in the //gs.
> 
> > The benchmark you list is not totally hardware dependent.  The quality and 
> > type of Basic will make a difference too.
> 
> Exactly.  The C128 vs. Apple comparison is very valid.  You'll have to use
> Applesoft BASIC (floating point).  This and the C128 BASIC both use the
> old Microsoft floating point routines; the operations involved will be just
> about identical.  If the BASIC on the PC is Microsoft than the comparison 
> is very valid; if you're using BASICA on the PC, its not, for the BASICA
> interpreter uses 7 digit floats verses the Microsoft 11 digit floats.
> 
> > Rick
> -- 
> ============================================================================
> Dave Haynie    {caip,ihnp4,allegra,seismo}!cbmvax!daveh
> 
> 	These opinions are my own, though if you try them out, and decide
> 	that you really like them, a small donation would be appreciated.