The 128 model will do the same only lasting a few seconds less... It doesn't share the Video memory, so the Z80 is not restricted.

You can test it yourself with the EP128emu emulator. It is more up to date than EP32.

It is not the fastest Basic on the universe.... but on the other side the machine offers a good integration of its outstanding features(video, audio) on the Basic commands, so at the end it is enough fast doing its things.

The main characteristic of  IS-BASIC is that it conformed strictly to ANSI BASIC, so it was not based on Microsoft Basic, the de-facto standard on almost all microcomputers of the 80's era. It is probably that its complexity made it slower than the other dialects.  

I feel it easier to program than  the competitors on your chart that I have managed. I specially like its Basic editor and the variety of good commands for almost any task.

If you want more speed you also can try the Zzzip Basic compiler.

                      EXOS2.1                                        ISDOS
                                                                        (C/PM 2.2)
                   IS-BASIC 2.1                          MicroSoft BASIC 5.21

           4MHz             7.12MHz                   4MHz               7.12MHz

           86 s                  41 s                       46 s                  22 s



Trefe

We also have the emulated machines to try, Spectrum and CPC... 

I have not explained me well: The Enterprise can emulate CPC, Spectrum, Commodore16 and TVC.

Well, actually stating EP can emulate C16 is a bit daring IMHO. Even if you consider only BASIC.

Ah, understood. I tested the "benchmark" in ep32 with the CPC emulator.

It finishes at 31 seconds. 5 seconds slower than a real or emulated CPC.

Seems to me that the CPC emulation on the EP is not as fast as a real or emulated CPC. Still much faster than either exdos basic or altair basic.

Still wondering why the basic interpreters are relatively slow on an Enterprise. I did some more testing with the compiled version on both the EP and the CPC, and while the EP takes ~1.86 seconds (including disk access), the CPC version finishes about 2.6 times faster (~0.7sec).

With disc accessing included the EP takes ~4.87 seconds, and the cpc ~1.9 seconds. Disc accessing seems slower as well on the EP, but I can't be sure without physical machines.

Obviously different compilers, and can't be directly compared - but still. The CPC hardware architecture might be more efficient? Not sure.

(Good news: I might be getting my hands on a real CPC664 again soonish!  )

And I really want to hook up my Enterprise 64 to a screen, but I do not have a scart compatible screen right now. Yes, I unfortunately purchased the Spanish video cable... I still haven't been able to test my EP.

It finishes at 31 seconds. 5 seconds slower than a real or emulated CPC.

Seems to me that the CPC emulation on the EP is not as fast as a real or emulated CPC. Still much faster than either exdos basic or altair basic.

CPC emulation on the EP is only a modified CPC ROM, and some modifcation can cause little slowdown, ex if the CPC ROM is placed into video RAM, and AY emulation routine can cause slowdown also, as i remember it is called in each 300Hz interrutp.

Still wondering why the basic interpreters are relatively slow on an Enterprise. I did some more testing with the compiled version on both the EP and the CPC, and while the EP takes ~1.86 seconds (including disk access), the CPC version finishes about 2.6 times faster (~0.7sec).

This basic testing is not the best measurement of capabilities of a computer, because it tells mainly that how fast the basic itself, IS-Basic handles differently the numbers (if i know well) than other Basics, it uses in BCD format, number handling is slower in IS-Basic, and it is much more complex than others.

With disc accessing included the EP takes ~4.87 seconds, and the cpc ~1.9 seconds. Disc accessing seems slower as well on the EP, but I can't be sure without physical machines.

Obviously different compilers, and can't be directly compared - but still. The CPC hardware architecture might be more efficient? Not sure.

Floppy Disk i/o is much faster on Enterprise than on CPC. Normally most of the things can be solved faster on EP than on CPC, because the CPC uses 16 bit I/O ports, Enterprise uses 8 bit I/O ports, and accessing 8 bit I/O ports needs less cpu time, and there is one thing which needs too much instruction on CPC, accessing the keyboard, and AY, 1st you need to program the 8255 PPI to be able to access them, then you can address the needed AY port, and at the end PPI should be instructed again.