In article <
[email protected]>,
fadden <
[email protected]> wrote:
Many years ago I was told that inserting NOPs into IIgs screen updates
could actually make things faster, because of the way the different
hardware components interact when you're doing a fast copy with shadowed >memory (insert a NOP every 8 or 13 PEIs). Somebody attached a logic
analyzer to a IIgs and timed it a few different ways, and determined
that there is actually no value to adding NOPs:
https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/q/228/56
Is there a flaw in their test methodology, or was this actually a myth?
Here is the post:
---
Mythbusted!
With 2021 knowledge of how the FPI/CYA work, this simply didn't make sense. So I plugged in a logic analyser and timed the Wolfenstein 3D code (NOP every 8 PEI's). I then modified the code to change it to a NOP every 13 PEI's, and finally to remove the NOPs altogether.
These are the results:
NOP every 8 PEI's - 40 PEI's takes 0.179005ms (4.475125�s/PEI)
NOP every 13 PEI's - 39 PEI's takes 0.17446ms (4.473333�s/PEI)
39 PEI's (No NOPs) takes 0.173758ms (4.445533�s/PEI)
As you can see it is faster to simply issue PEI's without any NOP's.
- Ian Brumby ---
Ian has collected a bunch of data, but he's not fully shared enough to
prove the NOP doesn't help (in my opinion). He probably has that data,
and he's convinced, so he's almost certainly right. It is unfair
to put the burden of proof on Ian to prove the NOP doesn't help.
A detailed waveform of 40+ PEIs (more would be better--long enough to show a pattern repeating several times) would probably be enough to