Have a Sinclair QL? Please run it for me!

Nagging hardware related question? Post here!
vol
ROM Dongle
Posts: 22
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2022 5:07 pm

Have a Sinclair QL? Please run it for me!

Post by vol »

I am doing some code which relies on the system speed. I tried using different emulators to get an idea of the original QL speed. I did 3 screenshots. They show very different performance. It seems MESS/MAME is massively inaccurate. QemuLator and sQLux show close results, so I can think that they are close to real hardware. However I am not sure. I have attached my program here. This program very quickly generates 16 Mandelbrot images. I am looking for results (a screenshot) from the QL with the 68008@7.5 MHz. I don't know are there ways to increase the QL performance besides the CPU upgrade. So I am also curious are there other ways to make the original QL faster? Thank you.
m-mess.png
m-sQLux.png
m-qemul.png
Attachments
mandelbrot.zip
(1.35 KiB) Downloaded 77 times


User avatar
mk79
QL Wafer Drive
Posts: 1349
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 10:54 am
Location: Esslingen/Germany
Contact:

Re: Have a Sinclair QL? Please run it for me!

Post by mk79 »

Speed varies mainly with the fact if external extended memory is available or not. The internal memory is contended with the screen refresh and slow in comparison. Different OS can also make a difference, depending on how many facilities are used in the application (maths library or whatnot). In your case OS doesn't make a lot of difference, though QDOS is a bit faster (which is counter-intuitive). But putting a TrumpCard memory expansion in makes a HUGE difference (much more than I would have expected)... it's all the same QL BTW, with a QL-SD ROM drive to switch the OS.

QL 128KB Minerva
QL128kb_Minerva.jpg
QL 128KB QDOS
QL128kb_QDOS.jpg
QL 768KB TrumpCard
QL768kb_Minerva.jpg
QL 4MB SGC
QL_SGC_Minerva.jpg


User avatar
Ruptor
Gold Card
Posts: 418
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:23 pm
Location: London

Re: Have a Sinclair QL? Please run it for me!

Post by Ruptor »

vol wrote:I am doing some code which relies on the system speed.
Why is sQulx so slow is it running at QL simulation speed or are you running it on a 33 MHz 486? :lol:
I remember doing a Mandelbrot on a 286 then adding a maths coprocessor where the difference was minutes down to less than a minute and I thought that was ace. That's the days when WIndows was written in Pascal and any upgrades made a difference in speed :o


User avatar
NormanDunbar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2251
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 9:04 am
Location: Leeds, West Yorkshire, UK
Contact:

Re: Have a Sinclair QL? Please run it for me!

Post by NormanDunbar »

Ruptor wrote:That's the days when WIndows was written in Pascal ...
Windows? Pascal? Are you sure, because I was of the understandingthat it was Macintosh no Windows. I've not found anything online about windows, but a few about Mac:

The Classic Mac OS, known at the time as System 1, was written in Motorola 68000 assembly language and Lisa Pascal.

Lisa being the Apple product that bombed, big time. I actually liked it, I was working on a college placement at the North of Scotland Hydro Electric Board's computer centre in Aberdeen and Apple can to us to give a demonstration of the Lisa. It wen't down rather well at the time, but went down too well when it was released.

Cheers,
Norm.


Why do they put lightning conductors on churches?
Author of Arduino Software Internals
Author of Arduino Interrupts

No longer on Twitter, find me on https://mastodon.scot/@NormanDunbar.
Derek_Stewart
Font of All Knowledge
Posts: 3928
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 11:40 am
Location: Sunny Runcorn, Cheshire, UK

Re: Have a Sinclair QL? Please run it for me!

Post by Derek_Stewart »

Hi,

Is the source code to the Mandelbrot rountine available?


Regards,

Derek
User avatar
mk79
QL Wafer Drive
Posts: 1349
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 10:54 am
Location: Esslingen/Germany
Contact:

Re: Have a Sinclair QL? Please run it for me!

Post by mk79 »

NormanDunbar wrote:Windows? Pascal? Are you sure, because I was of the understandingthat it was Macintosh no Windows.
Early Windows versions were written in assembler of course, later gradually moving to C and even later to C++. The Win16 API does use the so-called Pascal calling convention, but that was a conscious decision to save a few bytes on every call (C calling convention must clean up the stack on every caller location). Back then the Microsoft developers actually had to fight for every byte, too...


User avatar
Ruptor
Gold Card
Posts: 418
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:23 pm
Location: London

Re: Have a Sinclair QL? Please run it for me!

Post by Ruptor »

Back to my original question with corrected spelling. :lol: .
Ruptor wrote:Why is sQlux so slow is it running at QL simulation speed or are you running it on a 33 MHz 486? :lol:
The numbers don't look right to me. :?


User avatar
Andrew
Aurora
Posts: 786
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:10 pm

Re: Have a Sinclair QL? Please run it for me!

Post by Andrew »

NormanDunbar wrote: Windows? Pascal? Are you sure, because I was of the understandingthat it was Macintosh no Windows.
Up to Windows 3.1 at least parts of WIndows were written in Pascal.
Windows 95 was written in Watcom C. God, it was taking hours to compile anything!


User avatar
bwinkel67
QL Wafer Drive
Posts: 1187
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:09 am

Re: Have a Sinclair QL? Please run it for me!

Post by bwinkel67 »

Andrew wrote:
NormanDunbar wrote: Windows? Pascal? Are you sure, because I was of the understandingthat it was Macintosh no Windows.
Up to Windows 3.1 at least parts of WIndows were written in Pascal.
Windows 95 was written in Watcom C. God, it was taking hours to compile anything!
Were you at Microsoft? I was from '05 to '07 but then things were C/C++/C#.


User avatar
mk79
QL Wafer Drive
Posts: 1349
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 10:54 am
Location: Esslingen/Germany
Contact:

Re: Have a Sinclair QL? Please run it for me!

Post by mk79 »

Andrew wrote:Up to Windows 3.1 at least parts of WIndows were written in Pascal.
I could find not a single source for that.
Windows 95 was written in Watcom C. God, it was taking hours to compile anything!
At that point they had their own C compiler for 10+ years, why would they use the competition?


Post Reply