• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

10MHz battle: 286 vs NEC V30

J

jasa1063

Experienced Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
386
Location
Minnesota, USA
I currently have my Tandy 1000 TL/3 and Epson Equity Ie computers right next to each. This got me thinking that these computers are very similar. They are both 10MHz XT class computers with 4 8-bit ISA slots, 640K 0 wait state memory with a 16-bit data path. The Tandy 1000 TL/3 currently has an ET4000 ISA video card in it which allows me to test the 320x200x256 color mode against the MCGA adapter in the Epson Equity Ie. I upgraded the Epson Equity Ie with an NEC V30 CPU. Given all that, I wanted to run some benchmarks to see how well the NEC V30 goes up against a 286 at the same clock speed under similarly configured computers. I am going to do separate posts each with it's own benchmark results. From left to right will be the Tandy 1000 TL/3 and Epson Equity 1e

First up Speed. This is mid 80s benchmark I like to use on XT class computers. It has a pretty good mixture of tests.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0300.JPG
    IMG_0300.JPG
    1.4 MB · Views: 56
  • IMG_0301.JPG
    IMG_0301.JPG
    1.4 MB · Views: 57
The results clearly show that even though the NEC V30 is very capable CPU, it is no match for a 286 at the same clock speed. The 286 is just more efficient and has a 2 clock bus cycle time vs 4 for the NEC V30. I have always wanted run these head to head and now my curiosity is satisfied.
 
Very interesting results! I also find it notable that the V30 has a 15 mhz rating on the Norton SI benchmark.

I'm skeptical that this test really compares the two processors fairly, however. Without similar tests on more machines, I don't think we can be sure that there aren't other parts of the system affecting the results.

But at this stage it looks like you're probably right that the 286 is "superior." At the very least, your Tandy is superior to your Epson.
 
My whole point here was to do a comparison of the two CPUs under as closely matched conditions as possible. The NEC V30 will almost always be at a disadvantage because the instruction cycle counts are not as optimized as the 286 and it is in a 4o-pin package forcing multiplexing. If anyone would like additional benchmarks, I will be glad to run them. Please let me know.

Thanks!
 
Here are my top bench results for a Compaq Deskpro 8086 vs V30:

[UIDBC8413E9CE]
MemoryTest=2166
OpcodeTest=863
VidramTest=1754
MemEATest=1112
3DGameTest=963
Score=7
CPU=Intel 8086
CPUspeed=7.16 MHz
BIOSinfo=CRJ (C)Copyright COMPAQ Computer Corp. 1982,83,84,85-All rights reserved. (��������, rev. 0)
BIOSdate=20000101
BIOSCRC16=BC84
VideoSystem=CGA
VideoAdapter=Compaq CGA
Machine=Compaq Deskpro
Description=Compaq Deskpro


[UIDBC8412DD]
MemoryTest=1390
OpcodeTest=688
VidramTest=1468
MemEATest=859
3DGameTest=646
Score=10
CPU=NEC V30
CPUspeed=7.16 MHz
BIOSinfo=CRJ (C)Copyright COMPAQ Computer Corp. 1982,83,84,85-All rights reserved. (��������, rev. 0)
BIOSdate=20000101
BIOSCRC16=BC84
VideoSystem=CGA
VideoAdapter=Compaq CGA
Machine=Compaq Deskpro (NEC V30)
Description=Compaq Deskpro (NEC V30)

You can see a difference in benchmarks, but doesn't *feel* particularly faster.

[UIDE3A29D5]
MemoryTest=1291
OpcodeTest=1219
VidramTest=1690
MemEATest=1627
3DGameTest=1113
Score=10
CPU=Intel 80286
CPUspeed=7.16 MHz
BIOSinfo=(C) Copyright COMPAQ Computer Corporation, 1983, All rights reserved.
BIOSdate=20000101
BIOSCRC16=E3A2
VideoSystem=CGA
VideoAdapter=Compaq CGA
Machine=Compaq Portable (Orchid TinyTurbo 286)
Description=Compaq Portable XT (Orchid TinyTurbo 286)

The closest match I have in a 286 is the TinyTurbo 286 in a Compaq Portable. That is just too crippled to be a fair comparison, but is a huge improvement over the 4.77 MHz 8088.
 
It's been my observation for over 30 years that substituting a V-series chip for an x86 one won't result in a big noticeable boost in performance. A V-chip does give you two (potential) real advantages: Support for the 80186 instruction set and 8080 hardware emulation, although the latter is less important today than it was in 1986 because even a slow 80386 can outrun a V20 in 8080 mode using software emulation.
 
Chuck(G) said:
If you want a close-technology match, an 8086-to-V30 would seem to be a better match. Matching a V30 with an 80286 is not an even race--completely different generations.
Click to expand...

The V-series chips did have some significant architectural improvements over the 8088/8086 that arguably put them... maybe a half-generation? ahead of them. As Resman's Deskpro benchmarks show the addition of dedicated effective address calculation hardware was a pretty significant improvement even not factoring in the addition of the 80186 instruction set. But yes, ultimately it's still stuck living on an 8086's multiplexed bus with the same minimum number of T-cycles per operation, so even if its ALU/microcode improvements could have shaved instruction cycle counts down to the same ballpark as the 80286 (which it most certainly didn't) it'd be at a disadvantage.
 
resman said:
You can see a difference in benchmarks, but doesn't *feel* particularly faster.
Click to expand...

There's a slippery slope here, of course, but my rule of thumb is usually you're not really going to "feel" an upgrade until you get into the ballpark of at least twice as fast.

That said, if you're really down in the dregs then every little bit can help. I wouldn't want to live without the V-20 upgrade in my Tandy 1000 HX, but if you really pin me down about why I think it is probably more for the ability to run 80186 code then the actual "general case" speed bump. (It makes a big difference both in XT-CF BIOS performance and in letting you run certain drivers for crud like network cards and UMB-leveraging software.)
 
Eudimorphodon said:
There's a slippery slope here, of course, but my rule of thumb is usually you're not really going to "feel" an upgrade until you get into the ballpark of at least twice as fast.

That said, if you're really down in the dregs then every little bit can help. I wouldn't want to live without the V-20 upgrade in my Tandy 1000 HX, but if you really pin me down about why I think it is probably more for the ability to run 80186 code then the actual "general case" speed bump. (It makes a big difference both in XT-CF BIOS performance and in letting you run certain drivers for crud like network cards and UMB-leveraging software.)
Click to expand...
I can see a slight improvement when profiling my LORES library with the V30, but it's more about the ability to run Zip100 drivers and such. If I want to run something faster, I seem to have a lot of other computers to choose from ;-)
 
Eudimorphodon said:
The V-series chips did have some significant architectural improvements over the 8088/8086 that arguably put them... maybe a half-generation? ahead of them. As Resman's Deskpro benchmarks show the addition of dedicated effective address calculation hardware was a pretty significant improvement even not factoring in the addition of the 80186 instruction set. But yes, ultimately it's still stuck living on an 8086's multiplexed bus with the same minimum number of T-cycles per operation, so even if its ALU/microcode improvements could have shaved instruction cycle counts down to the same ballpark as the 80286 (which it most certainly didn't) it'd be at a disadvantage.
Click to expand...
The V-series chips were perhaps most important in the Intel-v.-NEC lawsuit.
 
jasa1063 said:
The results clearly show that even though the NEC V30 is very capable CPU, it is no match for a 286 at the same clock speed. The 286 is just more efficient and has a 2 clock bus cycle time vs 4 for the NEC V30. I have always wanted run these head to head and now my curiosity is satisfied.
Click to expand...
And that is all that really matters. ;)
 
resman said:
I can see a slight improvement when profiling my LORES library with the V30, but it's more about the ability to run Zip100 drivers and such. If I want to run something faster, I seem to have a lot of other computers to choose from ;-)
Click to expand...


You can use a zip100 on a 8086 no problem... Just cant use the iomega drivers, have to use palmzip.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top