Today, I found a bit of time for trying the board more accurately. First, I have run the benchmark program: 1 T1 = TI 2 FOR X=0 TO 1000: PRINT "HELLO": NEXT 3 PRINT T1, TI I think I have understood that the plus/4 has a TI "resident" variable that continuously changes its value. The program assigns to the T1 variable the TI one when the program starts, then prints T1 and TI, that are TI values of start and finish of the program. By making TI - T1 is possible to compare execution time of the program. Is my analysis correct? If it is, the 7501 gives results of TI - T1 like 2424/2425. The 6502 to 8501 board gives 2426/2425. So, I think the substitute board is as fast as the original CPU. I spoke about a bug with the cursor: maybe it was the board non properly seated, since now it is disappeared. Also, it was only into the BASIC interpreter (into the word processor the INST DEL key always worked fine). I tried the 1531 Datassette. I have written the benchmark program first with the 7501 CPU, then saved it to tape and ran the tests. When I switched to the "CPU module" and I gave a LOAD command... Well, sometimes the cassette motor doesn't start at all, sometimes it starts but the Datassette doesn't see the program and, after a while, it gives a ?BREAK ERROR In fact, I wasn't able to read anything from the cassette. Instead, if I try to SAVE somthing, the computer behaves like it successfully saves the program. Then, if I install the 7501, I cannot read the program saved with the CPU module... So, it seems there are incompatibility issues between the CPU module and the cassette. P.S. For Ruud Are you fine? It's because I haven't read any comments from you, so I just need to know if it's all ok. ____ / ___|____ Daniele Gratteri, Italian Commodore and Amiga user / / | | |___/ E-MAIL: email@example.com / / | |___|___\ URL: http://utenti.tripod.it/danielegratteri \ \/ / \____| IRC: FIAT1100D - ICQ: 53943994 \/\/ Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Archive generated by hypermail 2.1.1.