PPC is bad bad bad

[Hattig]

PCI 32 bit does not have sufficent speed to work a u160 adaptec card.
which needs a pci 64 bit slot to function att full speed.

Well if you are going to make a RAID 5 array then yes, you have a problem. Even then you could use a 32-bit 33MHz SCSI RAID card like the Mylex Accelleraid 170 without any problems, even if you are maxing out the PCI bus a lot.

If you are sticking a couple of hard drives and a SCSI drive on your SCSI card, then you will not be maxing out that 160MB/s - you will get around 60MB/s max on the fastest 15,000RPM Cheetah hard drives.

Graham

[Hattig]

still wouldn`t work , to do a fair test you would need :

1 . a mother board that can take both x86 and ppc , we`re benchmarking the cpu not the mobo here after all.

A fair test in this case could be:

Here is £1500. Spec out the best PPC / x86 board you can.

Now do these tests, both compiled using gcc.

But of course, "price isn't a fair comparison because x86 is so much cheaper". Hell, it is a valid comparison for my wallet!

A processor is as good as its platform. So it can only be fair to test using the best platform available for either processor.

P4: i850E w/ RDRAM 1066MHz, 533MB/s Hub Architecture
P4: i845G w/ PC2700 memory
Athlon: The chipsets all perform roughly the same, w/ 266MB/s to 800MB/s chipset interconnects
G4: Erm, PC133 SDRAM with 133MB/s PCI (but 2MB L3 cache)
G3: Erm, PC133 SDRAM with 133MB/s PCI

Hopefully later this year the G3/G4 platforms will be enhanced to make use of DDR memory and other modern technologies. A 1.4GHz G4 will be really competitive with faster x86 processors.

Graham

This entire thread is moot...

[color=FF3300]Bill McEwen already said Amiga OS is being ported to x86[/color][/b]

We'll have it on both, even if the "Amiga Digital Environment" doesn't wind up being a desktop OS that is as CPU-agnostic as the AmigaAnywhere module that shall be hosted/merged in it.

I personally think attention to a port of Amiga OS to x86(+64-bit) architecture is one of the wisest decisions ever made by any Amiga company.

Amiga on an Abit board with AMD processor(s). That would rock. If I remember right, Amiga OS (either 5.0 or thereafter) will also support multiple CPUs on a motherboard. Well, that's the trend. Things are going to move toward 64-bit and multi-processor-able. I don't  see PPC being [color=0000FF]as viable[/color] as x86/64,  until and unless a LOT of companies like Apple and Motorola and IBM pull out all stops to push them with a LOT of money and advertising.... I don't see that happening. If  PPC was so great--or if these companies had the nads to begin with, to take the risky route--they would have already done so in a big way.

 :-D  I think people are just scared of Amiga being on x86, myself. I think it makes them want to wet their pants or something, because they know that's where the fun begins.

I agree with an earlier post in this long thread, about if Amiga OS had been ported to x86, we would already  have had the first version of it out the door. I also agree that the BIOS that comes on these motherboards could be replaced with our own Amiga ROMs (same as a Kickstart ROM, etc.). I mean, that's what it is isn't it? :-)

Re-read the big bold letters above   :-D  We're going to see it on x86/64 architecture.

--EyeAm

[Insanity]

IDE performs roughly the same as SCSI at a much cheaper price point now.

No it does not.

1: SCSI is still much faster. The slowest SCSI disc (of the modern type nothing but u160 avaliable today)has a shorter Access time than the fastest IDE drive.

go figure that.

2: SCSI discs have a higher rotation speed,which meens that they shuffle data at a much higher medium speed.



3: u320 is just around the Corner. Of course it will cost blood, sweat and tears to get equipment of that magnitude when it shows up.

SCSI raid also relieves the processor of lots of work.

(all true H/W raids do this)


AND SCSI disc, ALMOST Never break down.

IDE disc break down constantly. (especially the IBM ones.)

[AmigaMac]

Oh, and to say that the modern x86 (eg Athlon) is unoptimised and inefficient is blatent FUD!!! I suggest you get yourself a good book on cpu design, and read it.

Actually it isn't.  Yeah the chips that AMD and Intel are getting fast, but not because of a good or efficient design.  The sad part is that I have seen Sun Boxes outperform Athlon Machines that had almost 3 times the clockspeed, I work around both platforms 50+ hours a week, I also love working with both platforms regardless of Sun's performance superiority.  I also own 2 PCs and 3 Macs, I know first hand about the pros and cons of both and I am convinced by the PowerPC technology, regardless of the overhyped and overclocked Intel chips and the propaganda that follows behind it.  Like it or not x86 is not a superior design, it is almost reaching its end, with Intel trying to figure out how to go about it with the IA-64 bit era.  Yeah I have also read that SPEC article from ct' and since someone was posting 'arstechnica' articles they might as well read this one as well;

http://www.arstechnica.com/cpu/2q99/benchmarking-1.html

SPEC is Intel's playground just like those totally unbelievable Photoshop tests are Apple's playground plain and simple.  SPEC's benchmarks doesn't show anything more politically correct than someone doing some Photoshop tests.  There hasn't been a good benchmark to go by yet.  Especially when you have to figure in software and its optimizations, or lack of (OSes included)!  The really funny thing is that PC (x86) folks sit here and ask why do we supposedly run more expensive and slower hardware, when they are running more expensive and slower software, it's almost like an oxymoron... Windows is the slowest OS running on the x86 platform, take Windows and BeOS on the same machine and tell me which is faster... that question has only one correct answer (I'll give you a hint... it's not Windows)!  Amiga OS is also going to put Mac OS to shame when you see its speed on PowerPC, I know that, but that wont make me sell my Macs nor will it make me sell my PCs running whatever!

For the Amiga I see no future in the x86 and it being a terrible design is not my argument, it's Microsoft and Intel... they dominate the PCdom and there is no room for outsiders.  Apple is no threat believe me, they got other fish to fry, and the only way to beat the Darkside, is for the Amiga, Mac and Linux communities (developers included) to share our resources, help each other along and get the bits together we need in order to over come this Mono solution that has plagued the computing industry... you know what I am talking about!

I might sound sorta biased, zealot or whatever, but I have been on both sides of the fence, both as a professional and a hobbyist, and I like this side of the fence... it has more to offer and that is why I am staying, PERIOD!

'nuff said
 :-D

[ Edited by AmigaMac on 2002/5/3 20:39:26 ]

[yoodoo]

Amiga's real strategy is to target everything in sight with the DE.  Those of us who are really keen will carry on the by now 'traditional' Amiga association by buying PPC hardware; others will use x86.  

For most tasks a PPC box with low power cosumption and heat-output will sit just fine, running all the common household apps.  For those that really want to produce 3D animation in realtime, go ahead and buy a fast x86 box.

Personally, I don't need to use Schumacher's F1 car to take the kids to school, my family saloon will do fine.

And if you want to compare costs, don't forget to include the cost of runnig the power-hungry x86 and all the fans you need to cool it.  For Amiga's connectivity vision to work, your main box will need to be switched on 24/7.  That's a lot of power for a wintel box.

Oh, and the PPC chips in the GameCube seem cheap enough and fast enough to run games on

[Hattig]

Yeah the chips that AMD and Intel are getting fast, but not because of a good or efficient design

It is - the chips are getting faster, and in AMDs case, getting faster per clock. Shame that they still lumber themselves with the x86 crap at the front, to be honest. And AMD are trying to do something about that without losing compatibility (the most important factor, sadly) with older software. Intel are faffing around though making 64-bit processors that nobody wants, and underperforming 32-bit processors. Intel got lucky in the 80's, and haven't really shown much reason recently for them to have continued luck in the desktop processor market.

The sad part is that I have seen Sun Boxes outperform Athlon Machines that had almost 3 times the clockspeed

Yes, the Sun processors are more brainiac chips, the P4's are speed demons and the Athlon less of a speed demon, and more of a brainiac. It is a design trade-off.

Unfortunately, the PPC is neither a brainiac nor a speed demon.

SPEC is not Intel's playground - it is an open benchmark that can be (ab)used by anybody. Gee, shucks, the Intel compiler is really good and makes code run really fast on the x86? Aww, thats not fair because the PPC only has gcc for AmigaOS.

Deal with it.

For the Amiga I see no future in the x86 and it being a terrible design is not my argument, it's Microsoft and Intel... they dominate the PCdom and there is no room for outsiders

Agreed. I don't want to see AmigaOS on x86. Maybe when x86-64 is available, and on that x86 platform only, but only because the platform is going to really perform excellently - 25% higher IPC in 32-bit code, 43% higher IPC in 64-bit code, etc. x86-64 eradicates more of the classic problems with x86 such as lack of registers, etc.

The best way to see x86 now is as a "compressed" in-memory representation of a program that the processor "decompresses" into native operations. And this has been done for many years already.

But for now, let AmigaOS4 run on PPC systems and run on it fast because it is such a lean OS. This is the catch-up period - lets hope that Apple don't take over desktop PPC manufacturing however.

Graham

[HyperionMP]

I see another PPC versus x86 discussion.

Please note that there were plenty of reasons to go the PPC route.

One of them was the fact that there are already 8000 people out there using PPC's in their Amiga's and who paid a lot of money for them.

Secondly, as the recent benchmarks from Petunia demonstrated, the PPC architecture is simpy better suited to emulate the 68K than the x86

There is no way that a Pentium 160 can emulate an 060/50 yet a BlizzardPPC will do just that.

Finally, some people suffered from a lack of historical insight.

They believe that because company x is on top now and for some time, this will always be that way.

These are the same people that believed 3DFX would rule forever and who know believe nVIDIA will always hold the performance crown.

I know this isn't true and I'm dying to tell you it isn't true.

Similarly, the PPC architecture used to be ahead of the x86 architecture for a long time during the haydays of the 603/604/ppc 750 (G3).

Then Motorola bumped up and hit a serious design flaw which kept their cpu's at 500 mhz for the longest time.

The performance gap (with respect to integer performance, not floating point performance) there is now can and will be bridged again.

I'll be here to tell you "I told you' with respect to nVIDIA soon.

I'm confident I will be able to do the same with respect to the G5

[Madgun68]

I personally think attention to a port of Amiga OS to x86(+64-bit) architecture is one of the wisest decisions ever made by any Amiga company.

Why? It certainly won't help AmigaOS be successful. The only thing it will really help are the people who don't want to invest any decent amount of money or commitment in to the community.

I think people are just scared of Amiga being on x86, myself. I think it makes them want to wet their pants or something, because they know that's where the fun begins.

Scared? Please. I think you've forgotten exactly what Amiga users are capable of. We believe in pushing hardware to its limits BEFORE having people play the upgrade game.

Oh yeah, I've almost forgotten how fun the x86 can be when the solution to bloated, unoptimised code is to throw more hardware at it.

MG

[Hattig]

I'll be here to tell you "I told you' with respect to nVIDIA soon.

I'm confident I will be able to do the same with respect to the G5

Well, with Matrox releasing Parhelia, 3DLabs releasing the P10, ATI releasing the R300, SiS releasing the Xabre, etc, nVidia can see that the market is just hotting up!

All their competitors have new cores. They have an old core nearing the end of its life. They are supposed to have a new core, the NV30, coming out to compete with the other cores however.

I think that AInc should work on the P10 - this bit of graphical hardware looks really good, and extremely suitable for AmigaOS, being optimised for OpenGL2 first and foremost. Hell, this chip is *really* worthy of being called part of a next generation Amiga!

[Tigger]

>>>Please note that there were plenty of reasons >>>to go the PPC route.

Not really given the current PPC situation, but I'm sure you'll have a few interesting theories.

>>>One of them was the fact that there are already >>>8000 people out there using PPC's in their
>>>Amiga's and who paid a lot of money for them.

Ok lets look at this, how did you get 8000, is that the number of PPC boards sold for the Amiga??   No, you and I both know that isnt an accurate number.   In addition, its fairly funny that given  Hyperion wasnt supporting 4.0 on any platform except the A1 until this week, that supporting the old hardware is the reason to pick the PPC.

>>>Secondly, as the recent benchmarks from Petunia >>>demonstrated, the PPC architecture is               >>>simpy better suited to emulate the 68K than the >>>x86.

Thats a very funny comment, anyone with a P4 (motherboard, processor and memory currently less then an A1) will tell you that the Petunia numbers were not impressive compared to what you can see with UAE on the P4.

>>>There is no way that a Pentium 160 can emulate >>>an 060/50 yet a BlizzardPPC will do just                     >>>that.

Lets see I dont you can even buy a Pentium 160 anymore, noone is talking about running the amiga on a Pentium 160, we are talking about running an Amiga on a modern x86.   A current generation Athlon or P4, both of which will greatly outperform the 600 Mhz G3 in emulating the 68060, and of course both of the x86 solutions are cheaper solutions as well.  
   
>>>Finally, some people suffered from a lack of >>>historical insight.
Yeah, but we've decided not to hold it against you.
    -Tig

[kubyx]

mips_proc wrote:
.....but i see it this way...a microprocessor is a microprocessor... the A1 boards will use AGP/PCI anyway...so why hinder things by useing PPC if PPC is going to be slower and cost more....

There you go again by saying it's slower, when in fact it's NOT slower. 500Mhz PPC = about 1Ghz 600Mhz PPC = about 1.2Ghz, and so on. :-)

by Madgun68 on 2002/5/3 14:21:14

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I personally think attention to a port of Amiga OS to x86(+64-bit) architecture is one of the wisest decisions ever made by any Amiga company.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Why? It certainly won't help AmigaOS be successful. The only thing it will really help are the people who don't want to invest any decent amount of money or commitment in to the community.

Yes it will. The parts for x86 are cheaper, and it's easier to market/sell than PPC.

We're not going back to the old days of Amiga--the days of the $1,000+ accelerator cards are gone; and hopefully,  so is the stupidity surrounding that kind of thinking.

As far as the community, when it comes down to it,  I'll take the Capitalist route rather than the Communist route any day. Screw the community, if I  can't buy a computer that I can wring every bit of power out of for as little money as possible; leaving me with enough money to buy software that will do some good beyond just having the mere hardware.

In other words, I'd rather buy an Abit card with an AMD processor, video card, audio card, etc., install Amiga OS on it, and then look around for Amiga software, because I know once they put it on x86, I'm going to have plenty more (compared with the old  days) to buy software. Of course, there's still something to be said for the fact Amiga software can still be improved a great deal--something a little better than the developer/programmer/engineer talking up simplicity and efficiency and power and tight code, and then showing me a bland little window opening up and that's  about it.

End users want the  power, they want it cheap, and they want the features that go with it. They want it to work, they want it to work well, and they want it to look like it works. Of course, some can  point to other operating systems that look great but basically suck, yet the sales receipts will show that they still sell. I'm convinced that even people buying those others only do so because of the elusive promise of things getting better--a  lot like electing the next guy because the one before was bad, and hoping things will change. And I never much worried about the ability of Amiga programmers or engineers or developers being able to code and  implement the wish-lists of Amigans (the very reason I never needed to be technical about the ideas I post).

As far as supporting the community--if we must, beyond our own selfish needs and wants--I'd rather support it with the truth as I see and piss off all the developers and the company itself, if for no other reason than to prevent it from making the same mistakes again, and again, and again, and again.

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think people are just scared of Amiga being on x86, myself. I think it makes them want to wet their pants or something, because they know that's where the fun begins.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Scared? Please. I think you've forgotten exactly what Amiga users are capable of. We believe in pushing hardware to its limits BEFORE having people play the upgrade game.

Oh yeah, I've almost forgotten how fun the x86 can be when the solution to bloated, unoptimised code is to throw more hardware at it.

 

Then, fine, do it on x86. Push it to the limits there; the CPUs and motherboards are inexpensive, plentiful, etc.. I caution you, though, not to think of x86 architecture as being related to Microsoft; and to further enhance what you said about what Amigans are capable of (though you said users, not developers there), I'm convinced they could take x86 parts and make it their own. We are, after all, talking of Amiga OS controlling that hardware; not some other OS.

Someone once told me that the latest Windows (I think it was 2000), was about 300MB in size. Someone corrected me once,  and said it was 800MB, or greater.

Amiga OS is less than 5MB. That's the Classic size, I believe. Even if a new one was 50MB, or even 100MB...big deal--if it's done the  Amiga way, none of that would be cludging up the system/memory/etc. at bootup.

I still think that PPC should be the 'high end', and in the realm of experimenting, nothing more... I don't care if they have it, doesn't bother me... If the OS is on both, won't  bother me; if it's a choice between x86 OR PPC, I'm choosing x86. OS 4.x series, to my  knowledge, is the  only one to be PPC-only. By the time 5.0 comes out,  it'll be on both (and possibly much more).

--EyeAm

[Madgun68]

Yes it will. The parts for x86 are cheaper, and it's easier to market/sell than PPC.

The parts for x86 are cheaper, yes.. But when you get right down to it, what REALLY is going to sell AmigaOS to Joe Average Consumer. Hardware or software? Software. You put AmigaOS on the x86 and you're competing with Windows for the desktop. Which operating system has more software that people are going to want? Windows. Same thing is happening with Linux. People are willing to put up with Windows simply because they have access to the software they want.

Will porting AmigaOS to x86 mean increased sales? Of course. Will it makes AmigaOS a success? No way.

Then, fine, do it on x86. Push it to the limits there; the CPUs and motherboards are inexpensive, plentiful, etc.. I caution you, though, not to think of x86 architecture as being related to Microsoft; and to further enhance what you said about what Amigans are capable of (though you said users, not developers there), I'm convinced they could take x86 parts and make it their own. We are, after all, talking of Amiga OS controlling that hardware; not some other OS.

Why shouldn't I think of Microsoft when I think of x86. Here's a blurb taken from the box of my Athlon XP 1600: "When you want extreme performance for WINDOWS XP, the AMD Athlon XP processor delivers." Hardware developers that work with the x86 arch. WANT you to think of Windows when you think of their products.

When you get down to it though, the real problem is drivers. Someone has to write them, and Hyperion sure aren't going to waste their time trying to support all the myriads of hardware out there the x86 world has. Whoever does 5.0 probably won't want to either. Who's going to do it?

By the time 5.0 comes out, it'll be on both (and possibly much more).

Unless AmigaOS gains a significant marketshare before 5.0's release, it won't make any difference how many platforms it'll be on. It won't be popular enough for software companies to give it a second glance.

MG

[WalkernyRanger]

i wont buy some obselete G3 for insane prices... and i think alot of people can agree with me here...

I, for one, do not agree.  How is the G3 obsolete?  It might not be enough to run some bloated crap OS, but it will suit OS4 just fine for now.  Sure I will upgrade to G4 or G5 when available.  But if we can emulate an 060 at 300mhz on a G3, it is already several times faster than my 060 at 50 mhz.  Think of the performance increase I will see for software designed for PPC.  Once again a G3 600mhz does not equal a PIII 600, and can not be compared on the basis of their mhz.

I am more than willing to but the AmigaOne at it's current price.  In my opinion I would rather pay more for a quality OS, then pay less and regret it every day.

[WalkernyRanger]

Sorry, guess I need some more practice with these posts!

[ Edited by WalkernyRanger on 2002/5/3 22:01:42 ]