Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

Speed differences - be more specific (Miscellaneous)

posted by Rugxulo Homepage, Usono, 05.12.2007, 22:31

> one year ago we did a "file copy" test with FreeDOS, EDR-DOS and MS-DOS.
>
> I used this
> benchmark with a 40 MB file (the benchmark limits file size to 64
> MB).
>
> MS-DOS usually was the fastest. First EDR-DOS was the slowest DOS, but
> after some adjustments speed was increased and it reached MS-DOS speed.
> FreeDOS is now the slowest.

EDIT: What adjustments? More BUFFERS specified in CONFIG.SYS? Shorter PATH to search? Defragged drive w/ full file reorder? HIMEM only or maybe JEMMEX (w/ VME switched on) on a 586?

> However, a test with a current SATA drive and without any cache program
> loaded shows that the differences in speed are negligible.

I do not doubt FreeDOS is the slowest, but I do doubt that it's in dire need of a speedup. In particular, I personally would like to know a few things about any such tests in the future (just to be more accurate):

* what kernel version (2036? 2037?)
* compiled by what (Turbo C? Turbo C++? OpenWatcom?)
* compiled-for target cpu (8086/FAT16? 386/FAT32?)
* what cpus tested in the benchmark (286? 486? Pentium? P4? AMD64?)

For instance, I've heard that a PentiumPro will run 16-bit code slower than a plain ol' Pentium. And of course, just from experience, I know my 486 Sx/25 is dog slow compared to my P166 (which is quite slow compared to my P4 or AMD64).

So, if someone out there wants to test, be prepared to give detailed information on what you used. :-P

---
Know your limits.h

 

Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
22632 Postings in 2109 Threads, 402 registered users, 441 users online (0 registered, 441 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum