brianw@microsoft.UUCP (Brian WILLOUGHBY) (12/29/90)
rlcollins@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Ryan 'Gozar' Collins) writes: >gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) writes: >> I estimate that a "stock" IIGS with 1.125MB of memory is fully as capable as >> a typical IBM PC clone; > >I cannot see the reasoning behind this. The current standard for a PC clone >is at least a 286 running at 12MHz with VGA and 1 MB of memory. A IIgs >doesn't even come close. >... It is based on >technology from the late 70's, with a few additions that were high tech in >the mid 80's but are outdated today. I don't follow your logic, unless you are considering typical applications and not the true raw power of the computer. Several benchmarks were done comparing the 1 MHz Apple ][ and the 4.77 MHz IBM PC. The two machines were roughly equivalent, with some tasks being faster on one machine, and some being faster on the other. At this rate, it would only take a 2.52 MHz 6502 to compete with a 12 MHz 286. In 16 bit mode, the 65816 is about twice as fast as the 6502. If you were to put an 8 MHz accelerator in a ROM 03 machine, you would have more raw power than the 12 MHz 286. I'll warn you about fairness, though - you can't compare a floppy based Apple system to a PC with a 1:1 interleave hard drive. You'll have to get a reasonably fast SCSI disk to fully realize the Apple's potential. Brian Willoughby UUCP: ...!{tikal, sun, uunet, elwood}!microsoft!brianw InterNet: microsoft!brianw@uunet.UU.NET or: microsoft!brianw@Sun.COM Bitnet brianw@microsoft.UUCP