6502/Z80 speed comparison (was MITS 2SIO serial chip?)

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Sat Dec 22 14:18:59 2001

see below, plz.

Dick

----- Original Message -----
From: <CLeyson_at_aol.com>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 1:45 AM
Subject: Re: 6502/Z80 speed comparison (was MITS 2SIO serial chip?)


> In a message dated 12/22/01 Richard Erlacher writes:
>
> > If you want to insist that you can devise a task, any task at all, mind you,
> > that you can code in Z80 code to run at 2x the clock rate of a 6502, in,
> say,
> > <80 lines of assembler, that's strictly a computing task, just to leave I/O
> out
> > of it, or any I/O task that you think you can code in legitimate Z80
> > instructions, providing a precise spec for the I/O task, then I'd certainly
> come
> > out and say you can't cook a legitimate one up that a 6502 can't accomplish
> in
> > less time, in the case of the computing task, and that, since the I/O task
> spec
> > limits the rate, the 6502 will be able to do it as well. I'd like to see a
> task
> > that meets those spec's
>
> How about a straight insertion bubble sort ? A completely useless task but it
> does take a defined number of data moves and compare operations. The array
> to be sorted could be say, 16-bit signed integer, 1k words long and in reverse
> order. (That should take a while for a 6502 to sort out).
>
Yes, maybe something of that sort would be appropriate. Testing it on 8-bit,
and then 16-bit quantities might be just the thing for testing the relative
ability, in spite of architectural differences, of handling longer data. I'd
suggest that larger records might be more appropriate, i.e. 32-byte records,
etc.

BTW, when I was in college, which I realize was some time ago, but, back then,
Bubble Sort and Insertion Sort were two different algorithms ... I don't
remember the differences, but will check my old texts, though they're in
Sanskrit ...
>
Received on Sat Dec 22 2001 - 14:18:59 GMT