Amiga.org
Operating System Specific Discussions => AROS Research Operating System => Topic started by: persia on January 13, 2012, 09:08:16 PM
-
What are the minimum specs of an X86 machine to get a good user experience? Let's assume an ICAROS install. There are a lot of old PCs that people are basically paying to haul away, would any of these make good AROS machines?
-
In theory you can run AROS on very low spec machines, with processor under 500 MHz and so, the problem is that modern applications and modern computing - as far as modern can get any AmigaOS experience - need more grunt. Realistic answer is you need a 1,6 GHz processor with 512 megs of RAM and a supported Intel or GeForce GPU that can give you also 3D hardware acceleration. There is an ARSO compatibility list you can search with google, please have a look and choose your configuration with care.
-
I think 16meg 486 is the minimum spec... It's actually compiled for the 386, but I think it now needs an FPU :)
If you want to compile your own, you could probably run it on a very low spec 386 :)
-
Right now I have a 2.0ghz pentium with 2 gigs ram and a nvidia card, and sblive and intel 100 net card. Its a very comfortable user experience on that.
My last aros box was a 3ghz machine, and I will say things seemed alot snappier and smoother on that, but still 2ghz is fine.
I'd love to see aros running on a 386 or 486, just because... I wish I had one to try...
The first time I saw AROS run, it was on an old pentium 1 90mhz I had laying around,booting from floppy once they got that native floppy boot working. It was just cool to see.
We've come a long way. I wouldn't want to run current aros on a pentium 90, but I would like to see it run on a very very low spec machine just for my own curiousity.
Steven
-
I think running AROS isn't so much of a problem as if your sound or networking card is supported. thats the only problem I've had with running it on any machine I've tried.
-
I had an old 25Mhz 386 laptop I found in a skip back in 2002 and the AROS boot floppy booted just fine... Apart from the monochrome screen it felt much like my A1200 in terms of performance :)
-
I had an old 25Mhz 386 laptop I found in a skip back in 2002 and the AROS boot floppy booted just fine... Apart from the monochrome screen it felt much like my A1200 in terms of performance :)
Soooo... you found a 386 in a skip and an Atari in a bin. Careful buddy, your going to get a reputation at this rate. :P
-
What are the minimum specs of an X86 machine to get a good user experience? Let's assume an ICAROS install. There are a lot of old PCs that people are basically paying to haul away, would any of these make good AROS machines?
The lowest machine I booted AROS on, was an Pentium I@100Mhz with 16MB RAM.
I needed to deactivate decoration because of its Memory usage, but with OS3.1 look, it worked fine.
-
Soooo... you found a 386 in a skip and an Atari in a bin. Careful buddy, your going to get a reputation at this rate. :P
"Dumpster diving" is something I picked up from a previous girl friend... :)
-
"Dumpster diving" is something I picked up from a previous girl friend... :)
You mean thats how she found you? ;-)
-
@others
What's wrong in a question like "What are the minimum specs of an X86 machine to get a good user experience?". Persia asked a configuration "to get a GOOD experience", and you are all suggesting that AROS can run on a dustbin with a obsolete processor inside? Please stick to the question. If he wants a GOOD user experience, he NEEDS a enough-powerful & supported PC, not a scrap taken out of the junkyard.
-
@others
What's wrong in a question like "What are the minimum specs of an X86 machine to get a good user experience?". Persia asked a configuration "to get a GOOD experience", and you are all suggesting that AROS can run on a dustbin with a obsolete processor inside? Please stick to the question. If he wants a GOOD user experience, he NEEDS a enough-powerful & supported PC, not a scrap taken out of the junkyard.
Depends entirely on what people expect to do. Not all of us care bout 3d games and stuff like that.
I think it's far for people to point out that AROS runs fine on slow machines like that. That doesn't mean people will or should expect all applications to work well on hardware like that - I think people on here are generally technical enough to realize the difference between OS experience and what applications demand.
-
@others
What's wrong in a question like "What are the minimum specs of an X86 machine to get a good user experience?". Persia asked a configuration "to get a GOOD experience", and you are all suggesting that AROS can run on a dustbin with a obsolete processor inside? Please stick to the question. If he wants a GOOD user experience, he NEEDS a enough-powerful & supported PC, not a scrap taken out of the junkyard.
Last time we had a poll running on AROS-exec some five or so years ago, people were finding 1.x GHz systems in the trash. I wouldn't be shocked to hear people finding dual core systems in the trash by now.
-
Last time we had a poll running on AROS-exec some five or so years ago, people were finding 1.x GHz systems in the trash. I wouldn't be shocked to hear people finding dual core systems in the trash by now.
I still have a 1.6 GHz single core ULW A64 I'm using (since you don't need a dual core processor).
Anyone that's dumb enough to throw away a dual core system (instead of parting it out on Ebay) is a fool.
-
That sounds like too much hassle.
If I had no further use for my old PC, and nobody I knew wanted it, I'd just leave it on the curb on a nice day and let some industrious stranger give it a good home.
That's how I get most of my electronics.
-
Aros runs very nicely on Acer Aspire One netbooks with the GUI being very responsive even with J-UAE running integrated on Icaros.
And in the past I had used an older version on an AMD K7 @ 600mhz with 256MB ram with a Voodoo 3 3000.
-
Aros runs very nicely on Acer Aspire One netbooks with the GUI being very responsive even with J-UAE running integrated on Icaros.
And in the past I had used an older version on an AMD K7 @ 600mhz with 256MB ram with a Voodoo 3 3000.
Exact. And we're talking about a 1,6 GHz Atom processor system (Aspire One) with 1 GB of RAM, surely not about a obsolete 400 MHz Pentium II or III. Whoever said everything depends on our own meaning of "good experience" was theoretically right, however there is a "general paradygm" which in practice states that a "good experience" is the ability to do everything the system can do without noticeable performance loss. Icaros allows to play 3D games, browse the web, play 1080p HD videos, emulate and integrate 68K software, draw images with Lodepaint and AmiFig, record videos from the screen and so on, but all these things need some grunt only 1.6 or more GHz processors can give. And best of all a complete supported system. You can be satisfied of half these things for a quick poke in the system, or for a curious trial, but if you wish to start using it every day - well - a fully supported, fast system is the best you can choose.
-
What about 2 GHz Pentium 4s? Well in the "junk" range but surely not much worse than an atom?
-
What about 2 GHz Pentium 4s? Well in the "junk" range but surely not much worse than an atom?
I'd say they're absolutely good for AROS. I just suggest to avoid anything too old or too much underpowered to give a good experience. Don't forget different processor architectures behave really different at the same core frequency. For instance, a 1.8 GHz Sandy Bridge processor will be better than a 2,4 GHz Pentium 4. But that doesn't matter at all: what I say, in the end, is just avoid to use those old 400 or 500 MHz processors. The fact that AROS can run on them doesn't absolutely mean you wish to use AROS on them.
-
I think those would actually be better than Atom.
-
I'd say they're absolutely good for AROS. I just suggest to avoid anything too old or too much underpowered to give a good experience. Don't forget different processor architectures behave really different at the same core frequency. For instance, a 1.8 GHz Sandy Bridge processor will be better than a 2,4 GHz Pentium 4. But that doesn't matter at all: what I say, in the end, is just avoid to use those old 400 or 500 MHz processors. The fact that AROS can run on them doesn't absolutely mean you wish to use AROS on them.
I think the approach is wrong, perhaps focusing in on a reasonable performance gfx card that AROS supports would be better as most technoids would associate a reasonable system with that level of GPU performance. ie, if the gfx card is PCI-E and not AGP, a 233MHz pentium would not be considered.
-
I think those would actually be better than Atom.
If you mean a old 400/500 MHz PentiumII/III would be better than a 1.6 GHz Atom processor, then you simply don't have a clue of what you are talking about, sorry. Atoms in-order architecture may be archaic and unable to give the finest results under heavy loads (with multiple different tasks in execution), but it is much faster than those old 400-500 pieces of junk.
Also don't forget the rest of the computer platform (memory, disk access, GPU) can help a lot to gain overall performances. I have a 1.6 GHz Atom Aspire One and a Compaq Presario N610c (whose processor should be faster than the Atom, at least on the papersheets), and Icaros performs better on the former than on the latter.
-
I think the approach is wrong, perhaps focusing in on a reasonable performance gfx card that AROS supports would be better as most technoids would associate a reasonable system with that level of GPU performance. ie, if the gfx card is PCI-E and not AGP, a 233MHz pentium would not be considered.
I do not agree, for the simple reason that 90% of the AROS software relies on CPU performance. Moreover, on single core speeds. GPUs are fine for gaming, however it's too early to stick to them to evaluate systems for AROS. People wouldn't just understand why they'd need a PCI Express GF7600 (example) to run Janus-UAE and OWB, for instance. And there are still very good AGP cards out there that might be used with AROS (PCI Express ones are better, though - no potential AGP software issues in the middle). The good things about PC hardware is you can mix it up as you like, with a good degree of freedom, so I prefer to give specs in form of processor, ram, drive space and - why not - GPU.
-
If you mean a old 400/500 MHz PentiumII/III would be better than a 1.6 GHz Atom processor, then you simply don't have a clue of what you are talking about, sorry. Atoms in-order architecture may be archaic and unable to give the finest results under heavy loads (with multiple different tasks in execution), but it is much faster than those old 400-500 pieces of junk
What about 2 GHz Pentium 4s? Well in the "junk" range but surely not much worse than an atom?
Thanks for the dickish attitude anyway, though.
-
I have an IBM PC 300 GL:
128 MB RAM
500 Mhz processor
Nvidia MX440 video card with 64 MB RAM.
Sound Blast 16 PCI ( emu10k )
Intel Pro 100 nic.
Unfortunately the ESS sound does not work.
I had to use a USB mouse and Keyboard as the ps2 ports quit working after Grub.
I seems to run well with Icaros 1.3.3, but it does get choppy when I want to move an application around on screen when something is running.
The patches do not do me any good, I will have to check Icaros Website.
-
I have an IBM PC 300 GL:
128 MB RAM
500 Mhz processor
Nvidia MX440 video card with 64 MB RAM.
Sound Blast 16 PCI ( emu10k )
Intel Pro 100 nic.
Unfortunately the ESS sound does not work.
I had to use a USB mouse and Keyboard as the ps2 ports quit working after Grub.
I seems to run well with Icaros 1.3.3, but it does get choppy when I want to move an application around on screen when something is running.
The patches do not do me any good, I will have to check Icaros Website.
500 MHz processor is good for standard-quality video reproduction (DVD should play fine, DivX videos with lower bit rate as well), playing music, looking at some sites with OWB, chatting with WookieChat, playing some simple games, but nothing more.
128 MB of RAM are the bare minimum to run some applications. Minimum specs for Icaros Desktop are 256, though.
GeForce 4MX is outdated and not supported for 3D part, but it should work for the 2D part.
No surprise Icaros Desktop doesn't run very well on your system. Please disable decorations in S:startup-sequence commenting out the "C:Decoration" line, disable Opaque and run the Services prefs to kill any unneeded service. Then reboot. Use also fixed IP for your local network if applicable. This should help you getting some speed improvement, even if it will lower somehow visuals. Ah, and disable also transparency in drag and drop operations.
...and please upgrade to better suited hardware if you can!
-
Thanks Paolone.
Well, I thought I had a compatable system. :D
I will look for more memory.
edit.
-
What about 2 GHz Pentium 4s? Well in the "junk" range but surely not much worse than an atom?
Looking at various benchmarks a 1.6ghz Atom walks all over a P4 running at the same speed in most tests, Super PI, Dhrystone ALU etc
And the 2ghz P4 is roughly in the same ball park performance wise