Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Benoit0123 <bgilon@free.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2.programmer
Subject: Re: Benchmark / Profiling / Timing on real hardware (Apple //e, //c,Laser 128) =?UTF-8?B?Pw==?=
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 11:54:10 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Mac GUI
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <benoit0123-1467633248@macgui.com>
References: <1b6b456b-1c09-4fc2-a185-432c57991fc9@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 11:54:10 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ac9e0e4d7dd3957fb97803ee6801bab8"; logging-data="5600"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19OoKJ9+CZvyn9wMQofgOI8"
User-Agent: Mac GUI Usenet
In-Reply-To: <1b6b456b-1c09-4fc2-a185-432c57991fc9@googlegroups.com>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:HNB9sD9fLn9UQJ1Nbs4av81hVNk=
Xref: csiph.com comp.sys.apple2.programmer:2820

Michael Pohoreski wrote:
> Let's say I want to benchmark my asm. code that slurps ##K off a custom
> RWTS.
> 
> How would I go about benchmarking / profiling / timing this on real
> hardware? 
> Primary will be an enhanced Apple //e, along with optional Apple //c, and
> a
> Laser 128.
> 
> I don't mean at the granularity of clock cycle timing (I already have
> AppleWin's TRACE for that :-) and the 602 tables), but of the granularity
> of Seconds and Milliseconds.
> 
> Minimum second accuracy is required (maximum would be ~2 minutes). 
> Millisecond timing would just be a sweet bonus.
> 
> NOTES:
> 
>  * I just picked up another ThunderClock Plus so that is what I'm thinking
>  will be the primary means of a clock source.
> 
>  * I also have the "No-Slot" option coming soon too ...
> https://www.ultimateapple2.com/catalogzen154/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=70
> 
> I have not searched usenet / forums -- I'll do that later. :-)
> 
> TIA !
> Michael
>fetaure
May I suggest that you get a look at the timing measurement routines I wrote
for the companion program of a utility I've written in the past months.
I've used them to evaluate the performance gain I get by using some features
of the utility instead of using plain vanilla Applesoft code.
The subroutines themselves are written for:
a) The Thunderclock peripheral cards (the first one advertised as being
fully ProDOS compatible) (file TCPRECON.S from source disks);
b) The internal 2GS circuitry (file TCPRECON.S from source disks);
c) The SMT NoSlotClock chip (file SMTRECON.S from source disks)
However, the accuracy I've got would not be above a second of time. That
would mean that many iterations would be measured between two "clock"
circuit pollings to be meaningful.

HopeTHisHelpsAsTheySay,
Benoît



-- 
Growing old is mandatory..
growing up is optional..
But the other way round is as true.