MorphOS : PowerMac G5 Port Update

[commodorejohn]

And it's not even the fastest G5 either...

The only faster one for single-processor use is the 2.7, which isn't that much difference. Still, not too shabby at all

[Crumb]

The only faster one for single-processor use is the 2.7, which isn't that much difference. Still, not too shabby at all

Since only one core is used it could be interesting to overclock it to 3.0 Ghz :-)

[BlackMonk]

How would you overclock it?

[som99]

Since only one core is used it could be interesting to overclock it to 3.0 Ghz :-)

As far as I am aware that's not possible on the G5 power macs?

[takemehomegrandma]

The only faster one for single-processor use is the 2.7, which isn't that much difference.

That 8% extra in clock frequency could push the lame benchmark not too far off of 8s though (with a little creative rounding)... :p

But more seriously: It is the fastest PPC desktop system ever built AFAIK. The champion of the class. It represents the peak of the PPC desktop era, how far the PPC platform ever reached in a desktop context. I hope MorphOS will run on it, as some kind of statement if for no other reason (like putting a flag on the moon or something).

(And soon it's about to be beaten by ARM )

[BlackMonk]

As far as I am aware that's not possible on the G5 power macs?

That is my understanding as well.  There's some resistor blocks that might help but the firmware or environmental control module detects when the CPU is running at a different speed than the motherboard is expecting and puts the whole thing into failsafe mode, fans blast at full speed and the CPU underclocks (say running a 1.8 GHz in a 1.6 GHz motherboard, underclocks to 1.3 GHz and blasts fans).

The only attempt I've seen is the one I just mentioned but it was using a stock 1.8 GHz G5 in a stock 1.6 GHz motherboard.  No overclocking involved.  The fans didn't freak out under LinuxPPC but the speed was only 1.6 GHz or 1.3 GHz regardless.

So if the bloke knows how to overclock a G5, I'm curious on a technical level.  If it's just wishful assumptions, well, I feel ya, buddy.

[Megamig]

Sick of Mac talk.. Macs are only good for the following

http://www.newlaunches.com/entry_images/1007/04/mac2_couch.jpg

[toRus]

2 bad my NVidia based Macs are not supported. If multicore support is ever implemented in Amiga world things would start to be interesting.

[som99]

That is my understanding as well.  There's some resistor blocks that might help but the firmware or environmental control module detects when the CPU is running at a different speed than the motherboard is expecting and puts the whole thing into failsafe mode, fans blast at full speed and the CPU underclocks (say running a 1.8 GHz in a 1.6 GHz motherboard, underclocks to 1.3 GHz and blasts fans).

The only attempt I've seen is the one I just mentioned but it was using a stock 1.8 GHz G5 in a stock 1.6 GHz motherboard.  No overclocking involved.  The fans didn't freak out under LinuxPPC but the speed was only 1.6 GHz or 1.3 GHz regardless.

So if the bloke knows how to overclock a G5, I'm curious on a technical level.  If it's just wishful assumptions, well, I feel ya, buddy.

Exactly, so as you said I would also be interested from a technical view to know if someone has done it (which I pretty much doubt).

[takemehomegrandma]

Sick of Mac talk.. Macs are only good for the following

http://www.newlaunches.com/entry_images/1007/04/mac2_couch.jpg

Too bad for you then, since the PPC Mac HW is the cheapest and most powerful PPC mainstream hardware suitable for OS's tied to the PPC platform, like MorphOS and OS4 both are, and it comes in all kinds of shapes and forms; tiny footprint by the Mac Mini, big box by the Power Mac, true laptop by the PowerBook (and soon iBook as well). They are the only viable options, they are simply the best. But again - this is only relevant to anyone interested in OS's tied to PPC of course...

[takemehomegrandma]

2 bad my NVidia based Macs are not supported.

If the model per se is supported and it only comes down to some unsupported nVidia graphic card, then it can easily be replaced with a supported card. Cheap, and not particularly troublesome by any means.

If multicore support is ever implemented in Amiga world things would start to be interesting.

Multicore is irrelevant to anything Amiga, true SMP simply can't be achieved without breaking the Amiga compatibility. And if that's what you want to do — break the "Amiga" to introduce new, modern features like SMP, true memory protection, 64-bit etc, etc — then why bother with PPC at all? Wouldn't it be better to go x86 or ARM then, migrating to some platform that still has a pulse?

:confused:

[BlackMonk]

There are various macs with nvidia video that cannot be replaced.  As an example:

http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/specs/imac_700_fp.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/specs/imac_g5_1.6_17.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powerbook_g4/specs/powerbook_g4_1.33_12.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powerbook_g4/specs/powerbook_g4_1.0_17.html

Though I suppose it's only an issue if MorphOS is ported to those platforms.

Multicore wouldn't really help the LAME benchmarks, but it would be useful in video encoding/transcoding and 3D rendering (i.e. fancy raytraced amiga balls).

I'd like to point out, too, that classic MacOS supported multiple CPUs in that it allowed specific applications to take advantage of them.  Some of the old dual and quad PPC 603 systems had photoshop plugins that allowed photoshop to use multiple CPUs.  The OS itself wasn't MP-aware and didn't do squat with the extra CPUs.  Here's an example:

http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=1028

I'm just thinking, wouldn't it be nice to have Blender or Lightwave or whatever take advantage of multiple CPUs?  Leave the rest of the OS and games and applications as they are.  And classic MacOS did that without true memory protection, without 64-bit, and even without being a stable OS!  

I'm not saying it's a must-have ability in MorphOS or AmigaOS 4.x or anything like that, but I think there are solutions that won't break existing things and there are benefits for multiple CPUs on a computing platform that's supposed to have a multimedia focus.

[takemehomegrandma]

There are various macs with nvidia video that cannot be replaced.

...and those are obviously macs that per se isn't supported!

Multicore wouldn't really help the LAME benchmarks, but it would be useful in video encoding/transcoding and 3D rendering (i.e. fancy raytraced amiga balls).

I'd like to point out, too, that classic MacOS supported multiple CPUs in that it allowed specific applications to take advantage of them.  Some of the old dual and quad PPC 603 systems had photoshop plugins that allowed photoshop to use multiple CPUs.  The OS itself wasn't MP-aware and didn't do squat with the extra CPUs.  Here's an example:

http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=1028

I'm just thinking, wouldn't it be nice to have Blender or Lightwave or whatever take advantage of multiple CPUs?  Leave the rest of the OS and games and applications as they are.  And classic MacOS did that without true memory protection, without 64-bit, and even without being a stable OS!  

I'm not saying it's a must-have ability in MorphOS or AmigaOS 4.x or anything like that, but I think there are solutions that won't break existing things and there are benefits for multiple CPUs on a computing platform that's supposed to have a multimedia focus.

PowerUP all over again. Amiga did that in 1997 already, and this is very far from being as useful as SMP. Over at AW.net some are dreaming (they are always dreaming there, aren't they, always *waiting* for something) of telecom/network infrastructure CPU's like T4240, 1.8GHz with 12(!) dual threaded cores, which would of course be terribly unsuitable and an awful waste of resources with a aingle core OS doing it the PowerUP way. And if you are to break the Amiga compatibility anyway (hence starting over with a clean slate) in order to achieve modern features in the OS, like the true SMP that would be required to make real use of multiple cores, then why on earth would you use these kind of PPC CPU's instead of using proper mainstream desktop CPU's...?

:confused:

[takemehomegrandma]

Wow, the 2.5GHz G5 is TWICE(!) as fast as the X1000 in the lame test

Correction: Make that THREE TIMES as fast!

Holy Crap Batman! :crazy:

[Karlos]

PowerUP all over again. Amiga did that in 1997 already, and this is very far from being as useful as SMP.

Actually, for once, no. The PowerUp model is not remotely close to finding some nasty cooperative-style hack* to use the second core in, for example a dual core processor. Firstly, you aren't dealing with two different types of processor and secondly such processors implement hardware cache coherency between the cores. They have to - it would be utterly absurd in any SMP model where a task is moved onto a different core as part of regular task scheduling only to discover the L1 looked totally different than when it last ran. Usually, the only contention in multicore processors is when two cores need to access the same cacheline (and if they are both just reading it, that's not necessarily a problem) and there are well established hardware protocols for that too. I think the PA6T uses the MOESI strategy or something very similar.

*Of course, this is not SMP, or even AMP.

[haywirepc]

uote:
Originally Posted by takemehomegrandma  
Wow, the 2.5GHz G5 is TWICE(!) as fast as the X1000 in the lame test
Correction: Make that THREE TIMES as fast!

Holy Crap Batman!


Really? 3x as fast? Even if its twice as fast thats funny. 3,000$ custom designed "amigaone" beaten in processor speed by double or triple by a 200-300$ ebay mac g5? Thats so funny... Unless you bought an x1000 I guess.

AOS really needs good cheap hardware.... I really hope Hyperion take their heads out of their asses someday.