Since we all see to have so much time on our hands . . . perhaps it would be
amusing to attempt to write the SAME logic in the SAME way on each
processor, then compare to see which is faster. THEN turn around and try to
improve the implementation of this logic to see which is easier to speed up,
and perhaps see which has the greatest cost in terms of memory usage, etc.
It's truly a retrocomputing exercise, as neither processor is "still around"
in the sense of mainstream applications, or even as an "active" product.
I guess that qualifies it as an extended topic in this forum.
Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: allisonp_at_world.std.com <allisonp_at_world.std.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
Date: Friday, April 16, 1999 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing
>> I realy love your mails - Just reading all of this I felt almost
>> 20 years younger - I was involved _very_ heavyly into the Z80/8080
>> vs. 6502 discusion back then - weh had a circle of engeneers where
>> one part wher 8085/Z80 advocates, whie some (like me) where 6502
>> boreheads.
>
>Actually I'm not done with it. just have the time. The fundemental
>problem is not really which is faster, I think for the real world
>applications they are likely close but the arguement is flawed. It
>misstates the z80 and 6502 timing vs real useage.
>
>What's funny is I have a kim one I can run and a z80 SBC for comparison.
>
>
>Allison
>
>
>
Received on Fri Apr 16 1999 - 15:50:42 BST