Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site uvicctr.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!uvicctr!collinge From: collinge@uvicctr.UUCP (Doug Collinge) Newsgroups: net.micro.68k Subject: 68000 vs 6502 (!) Message-ID: <151@uvicctr.UUCP> Date: Thu, 12-Sep-85 19:10:48 EDT Article-I.D.: uvicctr.151 Posted: Thu Sep 12 19:10:48 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 15-Sep-85 12:21:24 EDT Distribution: net Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria B.C. Canada Lines: 27 I have an application which is currently running on a 6502. I am thinking of replacing four 6502 machines with an Atari ST. One of the tasks of the CPU is to transfer 1024 bytes from an I/O device into RAM. I was wondering if the 8MHz 68k in the Atari could do four such transfers in the time it took a 1MHz 6502 to do it. Having computed the cycles I find that, yes, the 68k can just barely do it even though its memory bandwidth is twice that of the 6502. So for this application the 68k is the same speed as a 4MHz 6502! I think this is very funny. I salute the designers of the 6502 for making such a remarkably durable little machine. Yes, I understand that this is what the 6502 does best and also what the 68k does worst. And other factors make the 68k desirable here so I will probably use it anyway. I understand that the 68010 has a little cache in it to speed up loops just like this one. Can we drop a 68010 into an ST and expect it to work? Has anyone tried it yet? -- Doug Collinge School of Music, University of Victoria, PO Box 1700, Victoria, B.C., Canada, V8W 2Y2 decvax!nrl-css!uvicctr!collinge decvax!uw-beaver!uvicctr!collinge ubc-vision!uvicctr!collinge