3 ms·

Same here, wrote 6502 (C64) and Z80 (CPC) code and preferred the (double-)registers of the Z80 to work with compared to the limited registers of the 6502.

• Arnt 8y ago
  That's not a completely fair comparison. BCDE+HL+IXIY offered more space than the 6502's registers, but less space than its zero page, so the hierarchies differed. In both cases "A, something, main memory", but the somethings differed and it mattered.
  • _Codemonkeyism 8y ago
    You're right, though if I remember correctly the zero page was only slightly faster than memory access. I'm als influenced a lot by my personal circumstances, as though the Z80 took generally more cycles than the 6502, as I moved from a 1mhz 6502 (C64) to a 4mhz z80 (CPC) in general the z80 felt faster.
    • Arnt 8y ago
      Maybe it actually was. Code like (java) for(A a : b) a.c = false; certainly could be written very nicely on the Z80. By keeping a in IX and laying out the data structure as a struct where all of the bools are packed into one byte, the body of that loop could be just one (slow) instruction like RES 3, IX+4. But to get that speed you had to be aware of those possibilities and design the data structure. On the 6502 you'd lay out the data structure differently, playing to that CPU's strengths.
      • _Codemonkeyism 8y ago
        Interesting, I have no idea as I was writing assembler only, no code generation (except some assembler macros ;-)