Re: Accelerator //e

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer) wrote:

>Jonathan Schattke <wizwom@ripco.com> wrote:
>
>>Unless there was a strange modificatio to the chipsets since the
>>mid-80s, an 8Mhz 65x should perform as fast as a 25Mhz 16-bit Intel
>>processor, sheerly in terms of bus speed. (both would transfer
>>16MB/sec).  The 65816 has the same internal math that a 286 has.
>>So the chip that would be the "same" as a 65816-8 is the 286-25. 
>>Coincidentally, both were released at about the same time.
>>Both chips maintain back-compatability to 8 bit processors.
>
>Jonathan, that's what my tests show too.  An unaccelerated GS runs
>as fast as an AT from IBM.  This is an old AT, the 6Mhz version, so
>it is a 286 at roughly double in terms of Mhz the 65816 in a stock GS.
>Yet the run the computers at about the same speed.  The 286 was
>tested with both CGA and Hercules video cards, so it was moving no
>more screen data (less actually) than the GS was.
>
>Like I observed earlier, the 65816 is most comparable to the 286.

Correction to the above--after opening up the AT and taking a closer
look, it appears that this is the later model with the 8Mhz 286 Intel
processor after all...