The Sinclair QL Forum

Interesting, do you also use a monitor with 1024x768 native resolution?
Is the second SDHC card decoration, or do you actually use it parallel to card one? We did not test that much, always good to get feedback.

The small remaining difference in your benchmark figure looks like you have loaded some extensions.
I have also tried with and without my "usual" extensions and see a similar difference.

Hi all,

I just tried this on QPC2 on my laptop.

The result was 745.197.

D.

Hi,

Resurrecting this thread to say that Marcel's new Mister core got 15.896 with Minerva and 15.329 with SMSQ/E, both with 4MB RAM and "full" CPU speed.
Since this figure is dependent on various factors, I would take the precise number too seriously, but it gives an idea. The results seem to put it between the Super Gold Card and the Q68.

D.

BBQL with Minerva and (non-super) Gold Card: 5.640
Q68: 24.125 (SMSQ/E)
Raspberry Pi 3B+ with uqlx and Minerva: about 103
QPC2 on an i7-4790 PC: about 1500.

Jan

Apropos QPC, on my i7 laptop I'm finding that the results are very inconsistent. One thing is certain though; the GRAPHSCRN part is very very slow in high colour. It shows around 8 seconds, or a factor of approx 1.8 compared to a standard QL, while in 4 colour mode at QL resolution or slightly higher (640x400 etc.) it shows approx 0.04 seconds or a factor of 380. It also occasionally shows negative timings, which is weird.

At QL colours and resolution I have seen results up to approx 1800x QL speed, but it can also be much lower, for whatever reason.

It also seems to report a 512x256 resolution irrespective of which resolution it is actually running on.

D.

Hi,
are you using QPC under a VM ? Maybe parallels with Mac OSX?
I read VM (in general: Parallels & VMware) can slow down graphics, even if I don't remember why and where i read it.

Fabrizio

daniel_baum wrote:Apropos QPC, on my i7 laptop I'm finding that the results are very inconsistent. One thing is certain though; the GRAPHSCRN part is very very slow in high colour. It shows around 8 seconds, or a factor of approx 1.8 compared to a standard QL, while in 4 colour mode at QL resolution or slightly higher (640x400 etc.) it shows approx 0.04 seconds or a factor of 380. It also occasionally shows negative timings, which is weird.

At QL colours and resolution I have seen results up to approx 1800x QL speed, but it can also be much lower, for whatever reason.

It also seems to report a 512x256 resolution irrespective of which resolution it is actually running on.

D.

No, just regular Windows 10. It's actually a powerful laptop with an Nvidia 3D graphics card, although QPC of course doesn't utilise it. I've never seen any sign of graphic slowdowns before.

D.

One can find some other benchmarks with QTOP
http://qlheaven.blogspot.com/2017/11/q6 ... index.html and http://qlheaven.blogspot.com/2016/04/rp ... peeds.html

These are from almost 3 or 4 years ago. The Rpi now is up to version 4 with again a faster processor so it should perform faster now.

Cheers

Just minutes ago, after work, I had the chance to try QPC2&QL/E on a brand new Intel NUC with Core i5-1145G7 Tiger Lake CPU...

QLvsJAGUAR wrote:Just minutes ago, after work, I had the chance to try QPC2&QL/E on a brand new Intel NUC with Core i5-1145G7 Tiger Lake CPU...

Here‘s the rig:

Here‘s the result:


Performance, Index: 2103!

Anyone faster?


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk