johnc@dartvax.UUCP (John Cabell) (05/01/84)
Just becuse the benchmarks were tested with the same basic does not necessarily mean that they are the same and the comp- uter is the only variable. Most basics, even though named the same, are not the same. they have the same name (same company), but have to be dif- ferent because the inside of the machines are different. If they were all the same, they would be the same machines too. what I think that these benchmarks show is that the tandy 2000 is a very good, sophisticated machine that isn't just IBM compatable, but surpasses IBM. I'M glad tandy finally came out with a fantastic machine like this. --johnc (decvax, cornell)!dartvax!johnc
mjg@ecsvax.UUCP (05/01/84)
Another small contribution on Tandy 2000 performance. I have a 68000 cross-assembler I wrote in Basic and compiled to run on a number of machines. As you might guess it is very heavy on string handling functions and does almost no floating point calculations. On a 1000 line source code file the assembly times are: Apple II 10 minutes TRS80 8 [D[D[D[D[D[D[C[C[C[C minutes IBM PC 4 minutes Tandy 2000 2 mins 20 sec VAX (VMS) 40 secs So about 4 tandys = 1 Vax ! Mike Gingell, Raleigh, NC (919) 847-4779 .....decvax!mcnc!ecsvax!mjg