From: sinner@cafe.net (The Sinner)
Newsgroups: comp.emulators.apple2
Subject: Emulator Info
Date: 12 Apr 1995 05:02:30 GMT
Organization: Cafe.Net Internet Access System
Lines: 89
Message-ID: <3mfmt6$3gf@scipio.cyberstore.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: espresso.cafe.net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Please reply to wnight@cafe.net

At the suggestion of a few people, I have performed actual speed tests as
opposed to just guessing how fst the emulators are.

But first some corrections to what I said earlier...

Applewin does have keyboard equivalents for all of it's commands. I just
couldn't find a reference to them in the docs.

It also is not slow, in fact is just a bit slower than the dos-based
emulators which aren't quite at well implemented. (And significantly faster
than Sim2e)

I performed a series of 5 tests (which I will upload in the following
message) on my GS with a 8mhz Zip Chip, the GS running at slow speed (which
I used for the //e times in the testing program), and then Applewin,
Apl2em-2, Sim2e, and Applemu on my 486.

In case you care to know exactly what I was running to get the times that
I did, my machine is a 486DX4/100 with 48megs of ram, a Cirrus Logic 5426
1MB VLB video card, and QEMM 7.5.

The tests were a simple basic for-next loop, a text-scrolling test, basic
HGR routines, ASM counting (no output), and an ASM HGR routine.

        For-Next |Scrolling|Basic HGR|ASM Loops|ASM HGR  |Average
        ---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------
ZIP GS  11.2|5.35|8.4 |4.94|9.2 |6.08|24  |5.58|4.7 |5.74|    |5.54
        ---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------
AplWin1 61.5|.975|40.5|1.02|58.1|.963|125 |1.07|27.8|.971|    |.999

        -----------------------------------------------------------

Apl2em2 7.1 |8.45|5.1 |8.13|8.2 |11.4|11.7|11.4|12  |2.25|    |7.41
        ---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------
AppleMu 7   |8.57|4.9 |8.46|8.6 |6.51|11.7|11.4|12.1|2.23|    |7.43
        ---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------
Sim2e   19.1|3.14|42.1|.985|35.2|1.59|28.5|4.7 |118 |.228|    |2.13
        ---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------
AplWin2 8.8 |5.35|9.5 |4.36|18.3|3.06|17.5|7.65|17.9|1.5 |    |4.38
        ---------|---------|---------|---------|---------|---------
Average 25.6|6.37|15.4|5.48|17.6|5.56|8.94|8.79|40  |1.55|


Parts of this may not be clear so I'll explain what the number on the chart
mean. The first number under each test is the number of seconds it took it
to execute on my machine. The second is the number of times faster than the
//e this was. Fractional numbers mean that it was slower! The score in the
last column is the average multiple by which the speed of the emulator on
my machine exceeded a //e. The average score in the bottom row is how well
the compilers performed on everage. This show what things (graphics) are the
hardest to emulate quickly.

AplWin1 & 2 are not different program, but rather different settings in the
program Applewin. Number 1 is run with the control speed option on. This
forces it to try to run as slowly as an apple//e for games and timing
sensitive programs. You can see that it is almost exactly as fast as a //e
and that any difference is probably due to a slow finger on the stopwatch.
Number 2 is without the speed limiting on. This lets it run at full speed.

The //GS is also excluded from the compilation of averages, along with
AplWin1, because Aplwin1 is trying to run slowly and the //gs does different
things at different speeds that the IBM so the figures wouldn't correspond
with the emulators.

The bottom row of averages is for the last four emulators.

A note on Sim2e. I performed the testing with Debugging turned off, Page
Flipping turned on, and Flashing Text turned off.

Sim2e scored remarkably low in the ASM HGR text but seems to play games at
quite close to proper speed. I wonder if it has some speed limiting option
I didn't notice or if the graphics speed is simply compensated for by the
speed of the rest of it.

Comments on the program SPEED.TEST... it's just a simple little thing I
whipped up in an hour or two, but I tried to cover a range of functions.
Due to hardware limitations in some cases (machines and emulators without
clocks) you will need to time the tests with a stopwatch. But... considering
none of this is really important, I didn't think that little mistakes
mattered much. Just remember to take this into account.

Any comments on this, answers to any of my questions, problems with my
testing methods etc... would be appreciated.

P.S. If you want to use any of this or the program in the next message
in the faq or any other document you are welcome to do so.


