A92: Re: TI92Plus vs TI92II

To: killbat@usa.net, assembly-92@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: A92: Re: TI92Plus vs TI92II
From: Niklas Brunlid <e96nbr@efd.lth.se>
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1998 15:42:00 +0200
Delivered-To: assembly-92-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
In-Reply-To: <199808100356.WAA27462@mail-gw4adm.rcsntx.swbell.net>
Reply-To: assembly-92@lists.ticalc.org

At 22:50 1998-08-09 -0500, you wrote:
>PLEASE run tests on the 92+ and 92II if you can. I would like to 
>buy the Plus module, but it had better offer a speed increase if it's 
>going to cost me 70 bucks.

 Assembly:
I converted Jimmy Mårdell's Torus demo to the 92+ (I will release it if he
allows it). I ran 1000 frames (with lines) and timed it. Results:
92+:	01:16, ca 13 FPS
92II:	01:15, ca 13 FPS
92:	7-8 FPS (according to torus.txt), i.e. ca 02:13

 BASIC:
randMat(50,50) -> a : pi*a -> b
92+:	01:09
92II:	00:56

It would seem like the 92+ is every bit as fast as the 92II/92E in
assembly, just like I expected. I can't explain the difference in BASIC,
but I'd bet it has something to do with routines having been re-written to
handle the Archive memory or womething like that.

Niklas Brunlid - http://www.efd.lth.se/~e96nbr
PQF Quote follows:

REMIND ME AGAIN, he said, HOW THE LITTLE HORSE-SHAPED ONES MOVE.
        -- Death on symbolic last games
           (Terry Pratchett, Small Gods)

References:

From:

Prev: Re: A92: 92+ asm
Next: Re: A92: Hardware Graylevels & Interrupts
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread