> I am still using since years Eros Forenzi QSI as benchmark program. I will
send by private email
> the latest version I have. I ignore which is the version number, I think
only two versions were released.
> The second one performed 10 cycles instead of only one in order to cope
with faster hardware.
Thank you, I will look forward to receiving the other version. One version
is already on my website. Now I have finished work on the latest QL Toady,
which hopefulyl will be available by the Hove workshop, I am getting time to
work on the software download site kindly hosted by Phoebus (I think it's
the same as the old USA mirror site, which no longer exists). There's
already about 40MB of QL software there for download.

> Just for curiosity I had the chance to run QSI with QPC on a P4 3200 Mhz
with extra fast ram and it's
> actually slower than my Athlon 2600+ (2562 vs 2733 - i.e. 27,33 times
faster than a GC). Maybe QPC
> is optimised for AMD processors?
This is interesting, and I was very interested to read the replies on this
subject. Quite interesting to see how the truth is not always the same as
the headline, i.e. program speed is not always consistent with processor
advertised speeds!

We used to buy microdrive cartridges based on how many sectors they
formatted to...now we choose PC processors by how fast they execute QPC2 (or
other emulators of course). A whole new lease of life for QSI perhaps!

--
Dilwyn Jones

_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List

Reply via email to