Image Map Image Map
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 42

Thread: Tandy 2000 vs Tandy 1000 SL w/NEC V30

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    107

    Default Tandy 2000 vs Tandy 1000 SL w/NEC V30

    I know the Tandy 2000 used an 80186 CPU running at 8Mhz. I am just curious how a Tandy 1000 SL with an 8Mhz NEC V30 would compare performance wise. Has anyone ever run any benchmarks comparing the two?

  2. #2

    Default

    I owned both systems in the late 80s, my SL was stock and I never ran any benchmarks. My guess is the 2000 will still run at least 2X faster and mop the floor with the modified SL. My 2000 was some corporate system with every option that Tandy offered, including internal HD, 768K, 8087, color hires, CM1 monitor etc. A manager at a local RS let it all go for $100 bucks. That said, my EX and SL were 100X better because they were actually IBM compatible. The 2000 was like owning a Lamborghini without a steering wheel...crazy amount of power but next to useless when it came to compatibility. Around 1989 I let a friend borrow it so we could play Tradewars on the local BBSs and never got it back. He thinks it's still at his parent's house, so there's still hope I can get it back one of these days.

    Is there benchmark software that will even run on a 2000?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    107

    Default

    I also owned a Tandy 1000 SL and Tandy 2000 back in the day as well. I got my Tandy 2000 from a local Radio Shack for about the same money you did and it was loaded with every option as well. You could run Norton Utilities SI, which I know I did on both, but after 30 plus years I don't remember the results on the Tandy 2000. My CM-1 monitor bought the farm and after that I gave the Tandy 2000 to friend.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jasa1063 View Post
    a Tandy 1000 SL with an 8Mhz NEC V30 would compare performance wise?
    Would an SL not require a V20?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Marietta, GA
    Posts
    3,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Towmater View Post
    Would an SL not require a V20?
    No, the SL used the Intel 8086 CPU rather than the 8088 or a 286, an odd choice for the time really, so it would need a V30.

    An interesting comparison, I suppose, but one really needs to keep the release dates in mind.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    107

    Default

    That is a good point as the Tandy 2000 came out in 1983 and the Tandy 1000 SL in 1988. That is a 5 year spread to consider.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Principality of Xeon W-2140B the Great State of Central New Jerky
    Posts
    1,720

    Default

    Both have 16 bit data buses. There is nothing particularly remarkable about the T2Ks design. The 80186 I gather would only be faster then an 8086 if the onboard peripherals were utilized, which is not the case at all it seems in the 2000. It's essentially a 5150 mobo (in content anyway) with a 186 grafted in. The 1000s used asics from tne getgo, at least on the mobos I've seen. That could result in a speed bump I guess, but who knows. If I had to guess I'd say that 1000 model would be a tad faster. Did that 1000 have the same graphics as the original 1000? That's only 200 lines being written to the screen, the 2000 had 400 lines. Don't know if the 2000s graphics subsystem was faster then cga. But twice the resution is significant overhead.

  8. #8

    Default

    This topic piqued my interest, so I did some reading to see if my memory was off.

    I bought a new EX and loved that computer but eventually sold it and put that money towards a new SL along with a 32mb hardcard and Game Blaster sound card. I don't recall the SL being noticeably faster than the EX. Several sources mention a small performance edge over the previous 8088 systems, which seems about right.

    The 2000 was supposedly faster than an IBM PC/AT. Also, the 3000 supposedly had the same performance of the 2000. Can someone with actual knowledge on this subject chime in and confirm if this is true?
    I had some experience with the 3000 at the time. I had an after school job at a local pizza place and one of the largest BBSs in the country was run out of that building. The owner was using a Tandy 3000 that wasn't even on the same planet as my SL when it came to performance. I even have vague memories of him mentioning his previous 2000 and how he'd be using it if it weren't for compatibility issues.

    I've always read that the V20 and V30 gives a small boost in performance. Is that incorrect? Back in the day, could you buy an SL (budget pc one step above the HX), pop in a V30 and get performance to rival a TX or TL?

    It's essentially a 5150 mobo (in content anyway) with a 186 grafted in.
    Can you elaborate more on this? I can understand maybe saying that about the 1200, but the 2000?

    Did that 1000 have the same graphics as the original 1000?
    The SL had enhanced TGA.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    107

    Default

    Remember, my original question was a Tandy 1000 SL upgraded with an NEC V30 vs Tandy 2000. I have no doubt a stock Tandy 1000 SL would not perform as well against a Tandy 2000 with an 80186, since that chip had optimized cycle times just like an NEC V30 does. I guess a better question might be is an 80186 faster than NEC V30 at the same clock speed?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Principality of Xeon W-2140B the Great State of Central New Jerky
    Posts
    1,720

    Default

    Study photos of the Tandy 2000 mobo and compare it to a 5150. The dimensions and layout are different. But there are far more simarities then differences. The 2000 has all or nearly all the same peripheral chips as a 5150. The 2000 has very different (onboard) graphics though, based on SMC chips. That accounts for the bulk of incompatibilities.

    A 2000 maybe close to the speed of a 6mhz AT. I highly doubt it's faster, certainly not an 8mhz AT.

    Except for extremely weird pseudo compatibles like the Victor 9000, there isn't a whole lot separating any clone. The PC/AT has many if not all of the same peripheral chips as the 51510, but doubles up on some of them.

    The 2000 was dos and bios function call compatible with a 5150. Not typical, iirc the NEC APC III was only dos compatible. Again most of what made these things incompatible were the substantially enhanced graphics usually, but not always, based on a different vendor's chipset. The TIPC used the 6545 which is a close relative of the 6545. But the graphics particulars were different, and markedly better.

    And tell your friend he has no business talking dirt about the 3000 . It was the beast that everyone who owned a Tandy whatever up until that point wanted to have. I had to settle for an ITT XTRA XP (no it did not run Windows XP! It only had a 286!). With 8 bit ISA slots!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •