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!johncmjg@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