Amiga.org

Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Gaming => Topic started by: Corrie on June 14, 2003, 09:26:18 PM

Title: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Corrie on June 14, 2003, 09:26:18 PM
I was just browsing on the formatt homepage in the UK and I clicked on Quake II in the software section and I was suprised to read the system requirements as follows:

PPC equipped Amiga (WarpOS) or 68060/50MHZ with 64MB

I might be wishing here, but can someone confirm, does Quake II run on a 68060 @ 50Mhz???
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: HyperionMP on June 14, 2003, 10:35:31 PM
Yes, it does run on a 68060 and in fact faster than the original Quake from Clickboom.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: mikeymike on June 14, 2003, 10:38:25 PM
With what accompanying hardware?
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: bloodline on June 14, 2003, 11:00:47 PM
Quote

mikeymike wrote:
With what accompanying hardware?


An Athlon  :-D


/Jus kidding
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 14, 2003, 11:21:25 PM
It will run on 060, but you'll be much happier if you have a BVision and can run in 3D hardware accelerated mode. Otherwise, you won't have much fun.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Rogue on June 14, 2003, 11:34:01 PM
Quote
With what accompanying hardware?


The 060 version requires a Warp3D-supported graphics card. You can select the software renderer, but I wouldn't recomment that.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Aegis on June 14, 2003, 11:52:25 PM
How about under WinUAE? Clickboom's Amiga Quake runs like lightning on my 2.5ghz P4  :-)
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: on June 15, 2003, 12:05:28 AM
Quote

Aegis wrote:
How about under WinUAE? Clickboom's Amiga Quake runs like lightning on my 2.5ghz P4  :-)


Why not just play the Linux or Windows version on natively?
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 15, 2003, 12:12:02 AM
Quote
Why not just play the Linux or Windows version on natively?


Indeed. Q2 isn't very pretty without 3D acceleration, and UAE will never get that, and Q2 on Windows budget label is far cheaper than Amiga Q2, so why bother? Seems silly to me.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Leo42 on June 15, 2003, 01:53:52 AM
To be able to use Warp3D software on UAE, Hyperion (or anyone else) must release a 68k software renderer... (I know a PPC software renderer already exists)

Or we may dream of a Warp3D<->Direct3D wrapper ;))

Leo.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 15, 2003, 02:25:45 AM
Quote
To be able to use Warp3D software on UAE, Hyperion (or anyone else) must release a 68k software renderer... (I know a PPC software renderer already exists)


It's not quite that simple. Even the software renderer is card specific (for example, it doesn't work on my Pegasos). And it even if it was, it would be REAL slow and still would look no better than the built in software renderer of Q2 - in fact, it would probably look worse. It doesn't support fog, antialiasing, coloured lighting, alpha, mipmapping, blending or any of that stuff.

Quote
Or we may dream of a Warp3D<->Direct3D wrapper ;))


I think that previledge is better left in the hands of the people who pay considerable amounts of cash and/or development time for A1 systems. I still don't see why UAE users can't just use Windows equivalents of the software.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Corrie on June 15, 2003, 03:02:40 AM
Can anyone tell me how QuakeII would run on a Cyberstorm MKIII 68060 66Mhz, CybervisionPPC and 128Mb RAM????
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Karlos on June 15, 2003, 03:05:05 AM
Nicely, I would expect.

The only feature you wouldn't get is coloured lighting, which is due to the lack of chromatic blending on the permedia 2.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Corrie on June 15, 2003, 03:09:46 AM
Is the coloured lighting noticable at all? Would Quake II still look descent enough using the CybervisionPPC (DCE Version) ?
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Karlos on June 15, 2003, 03:15:04 AM
Well I wouldnt notice the loss of coloured lighting  much being as I'm colour blind :-)

It should look fine on the CVPPC. You still get bilinear filtering, transparency and other effects. Perhaps it's slightly less atmospheric with monochromatic lighting, but I expect not many people ever noticed!

Compared to software mode the quality (and speed) on the CVPPC is superb.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: redrumloa on June 15, 2003, 03:19:05 AM
Oh how I wish this would have come out while I still had my 060/66&Vodoo3 equiped A3000.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Karlos on June 15, 2003, 03:20:05 AM
Wow. What happened to it? Or is that a bad question?
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 15, 2003, 03:47:46 AM
Quote
Oh how I wish this would have come out while I still had my 060/66&Vodoo3 equiped A3000.


Fingers crossed for Radeon 3D support in MOS in the next while or so.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Leo42 on June 15, 2003, 04:34:45 AM
I'm already using UAE to developp Amiga/MorphOS software...

If some 68k renderer was available, I would be able to developp 3d apps/games as well... (no matter at what speed it would run: it's just for testing...)

>I still don't see why UAE users can't just use Windows equivalents of the software.

I know a lot of UAE users just want UAE to become a fast Amiga: so they want to run everything just like on a real Amiga (this includes Warp3D games...)

(This is not my case ;))

Leo.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Aegis on June 15, 2003, 10:06:11 AM
>I still don't see why UAE users can't just use Windows equivalents of the software.

What's wrong with giving your cash to Amiga games developers instead of PC ones?
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Rogue on June 15, 2003, 11:34:59 AM
Quote

Aegis wrote:
How about under WinUAE? Clickboom's Amiga Quake runs like lightning on my 2.5ghz P4  :-)


Never tried this, but the software renderer should be selectable even with the 68k version. I don't know if it runs on emulation, though...
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: bloodline on June 15, 2003, 12:21:26 PM
Quote

redrumloa wrote:
Oh how I wish this would have come out while I still had my 060/66&Vodoo3 equiped A3000.


Still, at least you've got half a million brand new A500's to play New Zeland Story on  :-D
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: jeffimix on June 15, 2003, 01:55:38 PM
Hmm, 060 with way too much RAM? Wonder if it's Possible to put 64 Megs of RAM in my A2000. Slow or not, that'd be fun. Maybe possible, probably not, but it may be...
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: mdwh2 on June 15, 2003, 03:03:43 PM
Quote

Leo42 wrote:
I'm already using UAE to developp Amiga/MorphOS software...

If some 68k renderer was available, I would be able to developp 3d apps/games as well... (no matter at what speed it would run: it's just for testing...)
Don't forget Mesa.. I've used it to do some 3D stuff under WinUAE, and the software renderer runs okay (albeit, slowly).
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 15, 2003, 03:09:20 PM
Quote
What's wrong with giving your cash to Amiga games developers instead of PC ones?


Well, why not go the whole way and give your cash to Amiga hardware developers instead of PC ones?
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: mdwh2 on June 15, 2003, 03:11:48 PM
Quote

KennyR wrote:
Well, why not go the whole way and give your cash to Amiga hardware developers instead of PC ones?
What new hardware that runs AmigaOS is this exactly? AmigaOS for the AmigaOne isn't out yet.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 15, 2003, 03:16:23 PM
Quote
What new hardware that runs AmigaOS is this exactly? AmigaOS for the AmigaOne isn't out yet.


If we can discard the name for a moment (which is just baggage), Pegasos and MorphOS are currently available. And before anyone goes flaming and saying that's not an Amiga, neither is a PC running UAE. And I'll tell you something else - it runs PPC and Warp3D applications, it doesn't cost the earth, and it's a lot faster than UAE on any machine.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: pixie on June 15, 2003, 03:35:12 PM
Quote
If we can discard the name for a moment (which is just baggage), Pegasos and MorphOS are currently available. And before anyone goes flaming and saying that's not an Amiga, neither is a PC running UAE. And I'll tell you something else - it runs PPC and Warp3D applications, it doesn't cost the earth, and it's a lot faster than UAE on any machine.


If you discard the cost from the name alone, and application development (warp 3D) it's only natural that as a clone you get it cheaper, but still is away from the real thing...
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 15, 2003, 04:11:14 PM
Quote
If you discard the cost from the name alone, and application development (warp 3D) it's only natural that as a clone you get it cheaper, but still is away from the real thing...


I think it's better than the real thing. My 200MHz 603e Amiga is too slow, even with 3D acceleration. But, if AInc give me my voucher, I'll be able to get OS4 for my BPPC, and I'll be able to compare MOS and OS4 more objectively. What I can say that is the Pegasos-2 is still more powerful than the A1XE, and so will still be better than the real thing - except that it won't run OS4. How good or bad that'll be, I'm going to enjoy finding out.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: LP on June 15, 2003, 06:10:42 PM
Will QuakeII run on my
A1200 060 voodoo3
with hardware acceleration?
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 15, 2003, 06:17:33 PM
Yes.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: HyperionMP on June 15, 2003, 07:27:15 PM
Let's compare those two systems at  the time the Pegasos II is actually released.

You seem to suffer from a rather foolish delusion that the A1 hardware is fixed in stone.

Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: mdwh2 on June 15, 2003, 07:40:25 PM
Quote

KennyR wrote:
If we can discard the name for a moment (which is just baggage), Pegasos and MorphOS are currently available. And before anyone goes flaming and saying that's not an Amiga, neither is a PC running UAE. And I'll tell you something else - it runs PPC and Warp3D applications, it doesn't cost the earth, and it's a lot faster than UAE on any machine.

And if we discard the name for a moment, you can also run Amiga software on things such as UAE or Amithlon on an x86 PC.

I never claimed that UAE is the fastest way to run Amiga software, or that it is the best or only solution - simply that it is a solution, and shouldn't be considered as not supporting the Amiga market or whatever.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 15, 2003, 07:51:36 PM
Quote
And if we discard the name for a moment, you can also run Amiga software on things such as UAE or Amithlon on an x86 PC.


And if we can get back to the original point, you can't run PPC or Warp3D software on UAE or Amithlon. Quake2 on UAE will not be able to harness either, which is not a small issue, it's a big one. So why not just use the Windows version? If you want to support Hyperion you can get the Windows exe's legally on the net and the CD from Hyperion, as far as I know.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: redrumloa on June 15, 2003, 07:54:08 PM
Quote
You seem to suffer from a rather foolish delusion that the A1 hardware is fixed in stone.


Eyetech have not announced anything different.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: ikir on June 15, 2003, 08:02:48 PM
I would like to try Q2 on my 1200 060 50mhz Voodoo3 (Mediator 1200), 64Mb ram :-)
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Karlos on June 15, 2003, 08:09:35 PM
@Ikir

I would like to try it on your machine also :-D
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: HyperionMP on June 15, 2003, 08:37:43 PM
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 15, 2003, 09:22:55 PM
Quote
by HyperionMP on 2003/6/15 20:37:43

Why should they?

As it stands, their current solution already outperforms the competition by a significant margin.


Uh... you must not mean the cheaper and more powerful Pegasos-2 or any PC...so which competition do you mean it outperforms?
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: alx on June 15, 2003, 09:29:45 PM
Perhaps he's just comparing Eyetech's current solution (the A1) with Genesi's current solution (Peg I) :-?
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Leo42 on June 15, 2003, 09:39:40 PM
In terms of bugs, there's not doubt AOne outperforms Peg... Unless... the DMA (and all others) bugs have been fixed ?

Leo.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 15, 2003, 09:49:03 PM
Quote
In terms of bugs, there's not doubt AOne outperforms Peg... Unless... the DMA (and all others) bugs have been fixed ?


It outperforms Peg-1, yes, I admit. And not by much, not by very much at all! If a Pegasos-1 was given a G4 CPU card it would no longer do so. As for the forthcoming Peg-2, this is years ahead of the A1XE.

And of course, as far as price is concerned, the A1 is not competitive in the slightest.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Corrie on June 15, 2003, 10:38:16 PM
It would appear that alot of users including myself were unaware of the requirements to play Quake II. I do not understand why Hyperion do not have a Quake II advert on their homepage under projects. Why not make it as available as possible for people like myself to see the exact requirements. If I had never gone to the UK site and read the requirements, I would still have thought that it was PPC only and never considering buying it. I think that it should be promoted more on the various homepages.

Just a point...

Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: mikeymike on June 16, 2003, 11:31:11 AM
Personally, I'm having trouble believing you could get a decent framerate for Quake 2 on an 060-based machine with any graphics card.  I'll put the definition of 'decent' at something morelike 'acceptable', let's say 25 - 30 fps.

Ok, so Quake 1 ran on an 060 at something like 12fps IIRC.  I'm not sure whether I'd expect Q2 to run better, even though it has OpenGL and hardware acceleration in its favour.  The amount of CPU calls even when hardware acceleration is being used properly is still very high, and the higher spec the graphics card, the better the CPU required to push the data required by the graphics card.

I remember getting [on Q2] 13 - 20 fps on a P166MMX overclocked to 200MHz, with a 3D accelerator graphics card (Permedia 2 based, 4MB), and that was with detail options toned down, and 512x384x16 resolution.

I realise that an 060 generally performs much better than a same-clock x86 processor, but not so much better that it could do Q2 that well.

Hyperion, screenshot please?  I can't remember whether the max fps command works on Q2, if not, a timedemo console result is good, that'll indicate easily enough what the colour depth and resolution is as well.  It won't indicate texture detail though.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Aegis on June 16, 2003, 12:49:27 PM
@ KennyR: Why would I invest money in any of the PPC solutions available at the moment when my PC outperforms all of them?

I use the Video Toaster 2 and LightWave 3D for my work which requires a fast Windows PC - one of the (many) perks being able to run WinUAE/Amiga Forever at stupidly fast speeds.

Using the Amiga emulation is a hobby which I enjoy & I'd love to support Amiga hardware and software developers but buying a PPC system just makes no sense at the moment. I've had several 68k Amigas over the years (500, 500+, 1200, 4000, CD32) but for now, emulation (using a nice collection of excellent Amiga software) suits me just fine.

Once (if) third party development for A1/Pegasos begins in earnest then I'll consider investing in a system, in the meantime I'll continue using my existing Amiga software (Image FX, Brilliance, PPaint etc.) under WinUAE and I'll continue to support Amiga software developers by purchasing products such as Quake II as long as I know they'll run under WinUAE.

Why run old PC games under WinUAE? 'Cause I like the Amiga environment and enjoy every excuse I get to use it  :-)
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 16, 2003, 01:40:49 PM
Quote
@ KennyR: Why would I invest money in any of the PPC solutions available at the moment when my PC outperforms all of them?


Because there is nothing currently running on a PC that is any substitute for a PPC solution, plain and simple. WinUAE is a slug compared to my Pegasos, and as I have twice said, it lacks support for newer PPC software - the stuff that actually needs all this CPU power you're throwing at it. What else do you use it all for, IBrowse? Clickboom's Quake?

UAE is great for playing old games, and I'll look forward to a GUIfied version with JIT for my Pegasos, but as a replacement for an Amiga for everyday use UAE is both deeply unsatisfying and somewhat unpractical. That's why it's worth buying PPC hardware.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Aegis on June 16, 2003, 02:46:56 PM
I wasn't inferring that Windows-based Amiga emulation is faster than running an Amiga-compatible OS natively on PPC hardware - just that my Amiga 68k software needs are well catered for by Amiga Forever/WinUAE.

As far as PPC software goes, the Amiga development community has shrunk so much that there isn't a single "killer" app left to fight the Amiga's corner (with the possible exception of the ever-capable Image FX which I can continue to use under emulation).

If all I did with my computer was play games, browse the net, send emails and use a word-processor I'd probably still be using an Amiga now but I bought my original A500 for DPaint and the huge potential the Amiga had for graphics work, a potential which is all but gone now and sadly, the time has long since passed since I was able to justify using an Amiga (hardware or emulated) for "everyday use"  :-(

When there's some capable pro or semi-pro level 3D and Video Editing software/hardware with industry-standard compatibility running on A1/Pegasos hardware then maybe I'll take a look but I suspect Linux will get there long before the Amiga does (which I'll probably investigate too).

The only other inroad for me into Amiga PPC hardware would be to purchase an A1/Pegasos box as a dual-boot Linux render node with either Amiga OS 4 or Morph OS - I guess I could always run Mac-on-Linux as well to add a bit more value but really all it would be is a new toy to play with when I'm not working and an expensive toy at that.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 16, 2003, 02:52:07 PM
Don't forget that using a PC is masochistic matched against using a fast Amiga. This is why people use UAE in the first place. I don't use my machine as a toy - I surf, play divx, emulate other systems and play games on it. My PC usually sits switched off, ignored.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: on June 16, 2003, 03:12:15 PM
Quote

KennyR wrote:
Don't forget that using a PC is masochistic matched against using a fast Amiga. This is why people use UAE in the first place. I don't use my machine as a toy - I surf, play divx, emulate other systems and play games on it. My PC usually sits switched off, ignored.


Erm.... I thought thats what using your computer as a toy involves? :-D
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Aegis on June 16, 2003, 03:18:11 PM
Aw c'mon - I'm using Window XP Pro and it works just fine - yeah it's got M$'s patented "kiddie" colours desktop, yeah it's major bloatware and obviously a native x86 version of Amiga OS would run rings around it but at the end of the day it runs the apps I need to stay in business.

WinXP ain't masochistic, it's just not Amiga OS - hell, I don't even notice Windows anymore - it's not like I DO much with it - all the magic happens in the apps that I use (most of which were once Amiga only - LightWave, Aura (TVPaint), Video Toaster 2, MainActor etc.)

Anyway - I'm not implying that your or anyone else's Amiga is a toy - just that If I bought one right now (which I can't anyway 'cause I need to spend my moolah on more 15k SCSI drives and a heap o' RAM) it would be used as precisely that.

I've waited as long as everyone else here for an Amiga revival and we're not there yet - Nothing would give me more pleasure than picking up a brand new Amiga system but until I have a use for it that's not gonna happen.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 16, 2003, 03:23:25 PM
I'm afraid I can't STAND WindowsXP. It's so slow it gives me a headache. And that's not even going into all spyware...
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: on June 16, 2003, 03:32:32 PM
Quote

KennyR wrote:
I'm afraid I can't STAND WindowsXP. It's so slow it gives me a headache.


What the hell are you running it on then?

It's slow to boot up, but it's not slow once you're up and running.

If you hibernate the PC, then XP starts up just as fast as AmigaOS does.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Aegis on June 16, 2003, 03:39:55 PM
Well I can't disagree with you there - even on a fast Pentium 4 there's all kinds of strange behaviour (staring in disbelief at that little torch trying to find your hard disks is a favourite  :-D ) and if I could run the software I need on an Amiga then that's just what I'd be doing.

But bloat-induced performance issues aside it does everything I need it to and surely that's the point?

I'm working on a series of short films at the moment which I'm hoping to get commercially released and my Dell Dimension 'Toaster 2 setup allows me to capture DV footage, edit uncompressed real-time video with LightWave-generated visual effects, mix audio and output to DVD all from one box AND I can play "The Chaos Engine" on it when I'm bored :-D

If there's a PPC Amiga that can do that then hell, yeah - I'm interested...
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 16, 2003, 03:48:23 PM
Quote
What the hell are you running it on then?

It's slow to boot up, but it's not slow once you're up and running.


1.3 GHz Athlon. It takes so long to do anything that I've just given up on it. If it wasn't the family's I'd find an iso of Win2000 and install that.

Hibernating the PC is problematic on Windows. Once it wakes, your memory as as fragmented as it was when you shut it off. And Windows just keeps getting slower...and slower...and slower...
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Terminills on June 16, 2003, 04:14:49 PM
@KennyR

 what speed hd's are you running... I run windows XP on a nice 10K rpm scsi and it's very responsive even on a 1.2 ghz athlon... Tho I have been debating thjrowing the scsi in my dual PIII just to see which is quicker.    :-D
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Stom on June 16, 2003, 06:57:11 PM
KennyR, dunno bout that slow boot speed you say in WinXP. My PC machine usually gets itself into gear quicker than the miggy does nowadays! :-/

Running on a XP1700 CPU WinXP boot time is around-about 18seconds (after the bios screen has gone which is a few secs worth)

Anyway, that was totally of topic i guess! :-/

Cheerio
(oh, dunno if anyone is interested but I uploaded a 'preview' of the redesigned amiga-mediator site to www.stom.co.uk (http://www.stom.co.uk), lemme know what you think)
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: B00tDisk on June 16, 2003, 07:15:49 PM
How would it run?

Let's just say that if you ran it at anything other than 320x200, all "effects" off, you'd have an FPR, not an FPS.

("First Person Raytracer" as opposed to "First Person Shooter")
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 16, 2003, 07:22:55 PM
Ok, topic has gone waaaaay OT, so this'll be my last post here.

My PC hardware isn't impressive: the HD is probably 'generic' UDMA and I only have 128MB of RAM, of which kind I have no idea, but it's a DIMM. The 'low' amount of RAM is probably the reason why its so painfully slow. I mean it. It gives me migraines just remembering it. I avoid that computer like the plague. :-(

But...Windows XP is slow, even comparing it against other versions of Windows. It has gained notoriety for it, even to the point where it gets slower with every 'hotfix' update. Couple this with the fact that VM thrashes constantly from power on to power off on my PC, and I have a system that is so unusably slow that even my family complain about it.

And it's partly my Amiga and Pegasos's fault, really. They've really eroded my patience. They are so responsive and fast that I just don't realise what kind of sluggishness Windows, Mac and Linux users put up with on a daily basis. They're used to it, I'm not. I guess most people here have never used a really fast Amiga, (currently only the Pegasos or Amithlon box, in my experience UAE doesn't qualify, sorry UAE users). There's nothing wrong with that, of course, but it's like using a monitor instead of a TV - once you try it, you just can't and won't go back.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: B00tDisk on June 16, 2003, 07:46:14 PM
Quote

KennyR wrote:
Ok, topic has gone waaaaay OT, so this'll be my last post here.


That's a pity.  You touched on something I like to discuss periodically, below.  Well, maybe you'll rethink and reply after reading this post.

Quote

My PC hardware isn't impressive: the HD is probably 'generic' UDMA and I only have 128MB of RAM, of which kind I have no idea, but it's a DIMM. The 'low' amount of RAM is probably the reason why its so painfully slow. I mean it. It gives me migraines just remembering it. I avoid that computer like the plague. :-(


$15 USD would fix that problem for you.  And about five to ten minutes tweaking things.  I hate to sound snippy, but please don't come back with a reply about "having to tweak things" - I break out in a cold sweat when I think about the poor bastards trying to keep towerized A1200's with a ####load of "dangly bits" hacked on, and library after library added on, and other hardware leeching VRAM from 3d cards to work properly...the list could go on.

So if you can spend 10=15 minutes getting an Amiga "working right", you could do the same to remedy your PC issues.

Quote

But...Windows XP is slow, even comparing it against other versions of Windows. It has gained notoriety for it, even to the point where it gets slower with every 'hotfix' update. Couple this with the fact that VM thrashes constantly from power on to power off on my PC, and I have a system that is so unusably slow that even my family complain about it.


You just said you were using substandard hardware you didn't want to be bothered working on, upgrading, or troubleshooting.  Who's fault is the slowness?  Further, did it occur to you that you can turn off the alpha blending and other things in XP to make it visually identical to 2000?  Or even '95?  This speeds it up greatly - and again, takes but a few minutes.

It's not Microsoft's fault for assuming you've got a reasonably fast computer.  I realize the Amiga mindset is to cling to the low-end standard as long as possible to squeeze as much performance out of the hardware, but the days when that was necessary are (thankfully!) long, long gone.  I mean, I didn't try to run OS3.0 at 640x480x128 on my unexpanded A1200 (Well, I did once to see what it would look like - very pretty, and far, far too SLOW!).  I ran it at a lower resolution and color depth.  I tweaked it so it ran as well as could be expected on the platform I had...

Quote

And it's partly my Amiga and Pegasos's fault, really. They've really eroded my patience. They are so responsive and fast that I just don't realise what kind of sluggishness Windows, Mac and Linux users put up with on a daily basis.


Here's another "amiga thing" I never understood, even when I owned and actively used an Amiga:  "The OS!  It's great!  Look at that window!  Look at that menu!  Bang!  Opens right up!  Boom! Closes right down!"

By that standard, GEOS on my C64 was about a million times better than anything the Amiga had going - except, of course, it wasn't.

Why?  

Because the software wasn't there.  I don't "use" an OS.  There are features of various OS's that get use from me, yes.  Sometimes Calc comes in handy.  Every once in a blue moon I'll open the shell to do some Q&D TCPIP work - but beyond being a place from which I launch applications, the OS is, quite frankly, meaningless.

That's why I've never "gone Mac" or "gone (back to the) Amiga".  The apps aren't there.  They just Are Not.  Internet Explorer and other browsers are the programs: The OS is merely the thing they sit upon.  An OS neither robs my pocket nor fills it.  

If DOS was still the rule of the day*, I'd be using it if that's where all the apps were.  If the Amiga was still a viable contender (that is, stronger than the Mac in the computer market in the 'States and at least as strong as the PC), I'd use it - because the applications would be there.

But that's not the case.  It wasn't when the Amiga was "huge" here - unless you were big in to Video Editing.


Quote

They're used to it, I'm not. I guess most people here have never used a really fast Amiga, (currently only the Pegasos or Amithlon box, in my experience UAE doesn't qualify, sorry UAE users).


Steve G.?  Is that you? (No, wait, you didn't call for the immediate arrest of Bernd Meyer, nor did you post foul language from an anon reposter, so I don't guess it is S.G. :lol:)

I, for one, have used a "Fast" Amiga.  Had one.  Sold it, bought a PC.  For the day, my 28mhz/030 Amiga was damn fast.  PPC cards were a gleam in H&Ps eye, and DCE was still a trustworthy company.  030/28/2mb chip/4mb Fast, 60mb HD.

Not the fastest, but a contender in Amiga terms in 1993.

But ultimately, it will be what's available for the AmigaOne when or if it plus AmigaOS for the A1 materialize that determines whether or not I'll come back to the Amiga platform.  Despite the delusions of some folks (not you, just some!) neither the PC standard nor Microsoft are going away any time soon, so an A1 purchase would be in addition to the stuff I already have.  The A1 would become part of the big happy family of computer gear I have! :D

Providing there was something I could do with it..  Playing with the OS and going "Oooh!  This boots/moves windows/opens menus so much faster than XP!" doesn't constitute "something I could do".

Footnote:
*No matter how hard some other deluded fools wish it, DOS has nothing to do with XP, 2000 or NT of any flavor.  Nada.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: on June 16, 2003, 07:52:22 PM
@Kenny

You have a Time Computer's PC am I correct? ;-)
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: mikeymike on June 16, 2003, 08:01:50 PM
One thing people need to take into account, and I'm not saying it's right to have things like this, but with Windows you need to know a good deal more about it in order to get 'very good' performance out of it.  Certainly with Win2k I get what I'd call "very good performance" (My PC specs (http://www.legolas.com/mikes/mypc.txt)) compared to any desktop computer (any OS) I've used, although I have never used a high-power Amiga (My Amiga specs (http://www.legolas.com/amiga/myamiga.html)).

I've seen that Windows XP can be tweaked to use about the same memory requirements, and just as responsive as Windows 2000, when it's been tweaked a la Mike style :)

I've written up an install guide for Win2k for my home system, which is available on my site.  This is because this kind of stuff isn't that simple to work out on your own.  The main advantages of it are to set up a decent security config, as well as switch off unnecessary background stuff to improve performance.  The less running the better, if you're interested in stability :-)
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: B00tDisk on June 16, 2003, 08:14:31 PM
Quote

mikeymike wrote:
One thing people need to take into account, and I'm not saying it's right to have things like this, but with Windows you need to know a good deal more about it in order to get 'very good' performance out of it.  


Out of the box?  No.  Two users, both of whom are relative computer "newibes" can be walked through the tweaks in about the same amount of time.  

In my experience.



Quote

Certainly with Win2k I get what I'd call "very good performance"
(My PC specs (http://www.legolas.com/mikes/mypc.txt)) compared to any desktop computer (any OS) I've used, although I have never used a high-power Amiga (My Amiga specs (http://www.legolas.com/amiga/myamiga.html)).


Good stuff.

Quote

I've seen that Windows XP can be tweaked to use about the same memory requirements, and just as responsive as Windows 2000, when it's been tweaked a la Mike style :)
  The less running the better, if you're interested in stability :-)


Even moreso on the Amiga which has no MP.  One flaky app, commodity or .lib and bye-bye system, hello reboot.  Hope you're not doing anything productive when it goes down!
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: mikeymike on June 16, 2003, 11:01:54 PM
@ B00tDisk
Quote
Out of the box?

Good Lord NO!  :-)  Anyway, I build my own :-)  That aside, no.  If I were to deal with a new PC from a supplier, once I confirmed all the hardware was working, through using the first installation on the box, I'd wipe it clean, repartition accordingly, format as NTFS.  Nothing worse than trying to back up data off a PC because it only has one partition where OS and apps/data are all installed.

Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Hammer on June 17, 2003, 12:55:04 AM
Quote

1.3 GHz Athlon. It takes so long to do anything that I've just given up on it.

There's maybe something wrong with your Athlon box ...

I have an old test Athlon Thunderbird (AXIA) box (@ ~1.33Ghz) that doesn’t have characteristics as your Athlon box (i.e. slowing down effect).

This box has the following;
+ PC133 512Mb SDRAM.
+ Win XP-Pro–SP1.
+ MSI-6330 V3.5 (with RAID HD controller).
+ 7200 RPM 60Gb UltraDMA100 HD (Seagate).
+ nVidia Geforce 2.
+ SBLive 5.1 DE (color ports variant).
+ Hibernating feature works fine.

I have several AMD Athlon based test boxes** to verify this. For example;

Athlon XP @~2.0Ghz
+ Win XP-Pro–SP1.
+ PC3200 512MB DDR (Samsung) (dual channel mode).
+ ASUS nForce 2 Deluxe (SPP/MCP-T)(400Mhz DDR FSB capable)(aggressive FSB/Memory settings).
+ 7200 RPM 80Gb UltraDMA133 HD (Seagate), 7200 RPM 40Gb UltraDMA133 HD (Maxtor).
+ nVidia Geforce 4 TI VIVO (Mepg2/Mepg4/DIVX in real time via the CPU).
+ nVidia Sound Storm (DirectSound/DirectMusic audio accelerator) .
+ Hibernating feature works fine.

**Athlon based Motherboard types limited to MSI and ASUS.
Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition was tested with above set-ups. Hardware operational abnormalities were not detected.  

They are all connected via 100/10BaseT NICs and 16Port D-Link Hub (Usual DVD –ROM/RW/CD-ROM/RW devices remains unlisted).

My WINUAE-JIT setup is at AmigaOS 3.9 (tweaked with usual visual bloating patches).  I tried Amithlon, but I don’t the have time to set-up an Amithlon based X86 PCs, maybe in the holidays.

AmigaOS 4.0 is probably the call card for me in purchasing a PPC based board.   I don’t mind Pegy II but it doesn’t have ‘AmigaOS 4.0’ (sigh)....

Quote

Hibernating the PC is problematic on Windows. Once it wakes, your memory as as fragmented

How could that cause the memory to be fragmented? Hibernation file is fundamentally a memory snapshot of your last session.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Hammer on June 17, 2003, 01:18:01 AM
Quote
Out of the box? No. Two users, both of whom are relative computer "newibes" can be walked through the tweaks in about the same amount of time.

IF the computer shop is worth it’s salt they should have configured the system with stability/optimal speed in mind.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 17, 2003, 01:44:52 AM
Quote
There's maybe something wrong with your Athlon box ...


Yes, it's a pile of crap. I could build a better PC with my eyes shut. As mdma said, it's a Time computer. Crap RAM, crap motherboard, crap graphics card. My Pegasos has superior specs in everything but the CPU.

Quote
Hibernating the PC is problematic on Windows. Once it wakes, your memory as as fragmented

How could that cause the memory to be fragmented? Hibernation file is fundamentally a memory snapshot of your last session.


It doesn't cause your memory to fragment. Continuous usage does. Windows is not like *ix, and has a an old and primitive form of memory addressing using linked lists, just like the Amiga. Memory under Windows will inevitably become more fragmented. Since the whole memory list must be parsed until it reaches a memory slot large enough on each memory allocation, fragmented memory means more parsing and therefore is mem allocs are much slower and cause a lot of VM paging to go on. This is why people complain that Windows, when left a few weeks online, becomes a lot slower. In fact, after a few days intensive usage Windows should be able to do nothing else but whack the HD.

Usually a reboot returns the system to its pristine state. Waking up from hybernation doesn't. It just continues on from the last time you shut it down. The fragmentation remains to get worse.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 17, 2003, 01:48:53 AM
Quote
$15 USD would fix that problem for you. And about five to ten minutes tweaking things. I hate to sound snippy, but please don't come back with a reply about "having to tweak things"


It's not my technically my PC to tweak or spend money on. I can't do anything with that PC except use it, and try my best not to punch the screen. I suppose I could tweak it, but its present speed doesn't make me want to go near it. And I really, really don't like using Windows.

Quote
Providing there was something I could do with it.. Playing with the OS and going "Oooh! This boots/moves windows/opens menus so much faster than XP!" doesn't constitute "something I could do".


System responsiveness is IMO the single most important property an OS can impart. This is 2003. We have processors that can do billions of cycles a second. We have hard drives that can spool over 40MB/s. Why then do we have to literally wait until apps open? Why do we have to put up with window borders redrawing and the GUI remaining blank for more than 5 seconds it until the system can devote some cycles of an awesomely fast CPU to it? It's totally silly. IMO, in 2003, we should not have to wait for anything. And we should especially not have to wait because of some useless window dressing and a software company who can't code.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Karlos on June 17, 2003, 01:56:37 AM
Kenny,

My sentiments exactly. Windows is the single biggest performance sucking piece of crap ever conceived.

For example, after booting, with no additional apps, my Win2K is using over 100M of ram according to task manager. What for, for f*cks sake? I have all non essential services turned off and the others set to load when required).

It's unreal. I can watch the CPU usage jump over 50% just typing into this window.

What kind of utter, god awful sloppiness is it?
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: B00tDisk on June 17, 2003, 02:11:06 AM
Quote

KennyR wrote:


It's not my technically my PC to tweak or spend money on. I can't do anything with that PC except use it, and try my best not to punch the screen. I suppose I could tweak it, but its present speed doesn't make me want to go near it. And I really, really don't like using Windows.


You've got rage issues then.  Those aside, then by all means, don't use it.  I offer you a solution, and you dodge.  


Quote

System responsiveness is IMO the single most important property an OS can impart.


Garbage.

I don't "wait" for things to open.  A slight pause doesn't eat away at my soul.  The single most imporant property an OS can impart is it's ability to run applications.  The availability of those applications is why I go there.  If I were after a pretty but application void OS, I'd use BeOS or NeXTStep/OpenStep.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: B00tDisk on June 17, 2003, 02:12:59 AM
Quote

Karlos wrote:
Kenny,

My sentiments exactly. Windows is the single biggest performance sucking piece of crap ever conceived.

For example, after booting, with no additional apps, my Win2K is using over 100M of ram according to task manager. What for, for f*cks sake? I have all non essential services turned off and the others set to load when required).

It's unreal. I can watch the CPU usage jump over 50% just typing into this window.

What kind of utter, god awful sloppiness is it?


Whoa, considering how expensive RAM is I can certainly see where that'd be a problem.

Why is it Amiga users are the only ones who seem to have these mysterious issues with their PCs?
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Hammer on June 17, 2003, 02:16:55 AM
Quote
My PC hardware isn't impressive: the HD is probably 'generic' UDMA

What kind of chipset does you Athlon box employs?
Are you using UDMA66/100 IDE cabling?
Have you run MS’s Boot’Vis utility?  
How aggressive is your memory timings?

Quote
I only have 128MB of RAM

Try increasing it to at least another 64Mb.  
I have a test Celeron @500Mhz box that has 192Mb and it run XP-Home fine (i.e. closer to WinXP’s ideal memory model).

Quote

I have a system that is so unusably slow that even my family complain about it.

Sad to hear.  

I think, there are websites that covers on how to lighten up your XP setup (e.g. what services to turn off). There might be some Amiga.org members may offer some ways to lighten your XP set-up.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Karlos on June 17, 2003, 02:27:25 AM
@BOOtDisk

Maybe I want to keep memory free for those applications you rate so highly.

Look, the fact that the OS can swallow such a f*cking huge chunk to do absolutely bugger all is shameful. You can't deny it and remaking how cheap ram is these days is not the point. I could have 1G of ram for all you know, thats still 10% wasted for sod all and it still bitches at me about VM usage...

Actually, when I had considerably less memory installed, the amount used by windows after boot up was less by a similar factor (about 60M). So, is Win2K just using an extra 40M just to help it remember that it now has a lot more additional memory to waste than it used to? :lol:

No other OS I have *ever* seen (and I've seen a few) behaves in such a strange resource hungry way.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 17, 2003, 02:27:59 AM
Quote
You've got rage issues then. Those aside, then by all means, don't use it. I offer you a solution, and you dodge.


No rage involved. Each to his own. Some people like swimming, some don't, etc. I don't like using Windows. I'm simply not going to use that PC, that's my solution. I have my own. It's a 200MHz one, but it's still more responsive than the Athlon box.

Quote
Garbage.

I don't "wait" for things to open. A slight pause doesn't eat away at my soul. The single most imporant property an OS can impart is it's ability to run applications. The availability of those applications is why I go there. If I were after a pretty but application void OS, I'd use BeOS or NeXTStep/OpenStep.


I said in my opinion. You think that applications are more important. I think it's responsiveness and useability. This is why I'm typing this on MorphOS and you on a PC browser. Again, each to his own.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 17, 2003, 02:33:36 AM
Quote
What kind of chipset does you Athlon box employs?
Are you using UDMA66/100 IDE cabling?
Have you run MS's Boot'Vis utility?
How aggressive is your memory timings?


Chipset: VIA.
UDMA66/100 cabling: Don't know.
MS Boot'Vis: No.
Memory timings: Don't know.

But the performance impact of these things shouldn't really cause XP to be so slow. I mean, I can't really state this enough, I get angry even going near the machine. I've never used anything so slow, ever - not even an unexpanded A1200.

Quote
Try increasing it to at least another 64Mb.
I have a test Celeron @500Mhz box that has 192Mb and it run XP-Home fine (i.e. closer to WinXP's ideal memory model).


Time probably gave me two 64MB DIMMS, or even worse, four 32MB ones. I'd need to buy at least 128MB DIMM. It's too costly a step for me, considering it's not even my computer. And I have no idea what kind to buy, or whether they'd conflict with my current ones...

Quote
I think, there are websites that covers on how to lighten up your XP setup (e.g. what services to turn off). There might be some Amiga.org members may offer some ways to lighten your XP set-up.


Thanks, I'll try to get my sister to look at them. Considering it takes about a minute to load IE, I'm not going to do it myself. I would end up destroying the machine in frustration. Not rage against Windows, just sheer impatience.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 17, 2003, 02:37:03 AM
Quote
Why is it Amiga users are the only ones who seem to have these mysterious issues with their PCs?


Because we don't like spending time on them.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Hammer on June 17, 2003, 02:45:10 AM
Quote
Yes, it's a pile of crap. I could build a better PC with my eyes shut. As mdma said, it's a Time computer.

A Time Computer? I'm not familiar with that particular brand or make.  

Quote
Memory under Windows will inevitably become more fragmented. Since the whole memory list must be parsed until it reaches a memory slot large enough on each memory allocation, fragmented memory means more parsing and therefore is mem allocs are much slower and cause a lot of VM paging to go on. This is why people complain that Windows, when left a few weeks online, becomes a lot slower. In fact, after a few days intensive usage Windows should be able to do nothing else but whack the HD.

There are utilities that defrags your memory at periodical basis.

Secondly, our company's development Pentium 4 1.8Ghz (with 850 chipset + ~1Gb Rambus RAM) server** (always online) doesn't have these characteristics e.g.  "In fact, after a few days intensive usage Windows should be able to do nothing else but whack the HD".

**PS Runs on Windows 2000 Advance Server.

For Linux "memory fragmentation" issues refer to
http://www.surriel.com/zone-alloc.html

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Linux+%22memory+fragmentation%22+&meta=

In a real perspective, Linux does have its own share of memory fragmentations.

A solution against memory fragmentations refer to
http://www.rsinc.com/services/techtip.asp?ttid=3346&PV=YES
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 17, 2003, 02:56:45 AM
Time Computers are a UK company that specialise in making really substandard PCs look cheaper and better than building one from scratch or getting a PC from someone who can. Their customer support is terrible, their hardware is substandard, and I strongly recommend anyone reading this not to choose this company. Their PCs are custom branded but their motherboards are usually cheap, poor brands.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Hammer on June 17, 2003, 03:11:36 AM
Quote

KennyR wrote:
Time Computers are a UK company that specialise in making really substandard PCs look cheaper and better than building one themselves. Their customer support is terrible, their hardware is substandard, and I strongly recommend anyone reading this not to choose this company. Their PCs are custom branded but their motherboards are usually cheap, poor brands.

What kind of motherboard brands are they using (specifically your motherboard type)?  

I notice some of their PCs lines uses a Microstar International a.k.a MSI. The same motherboard manufacture for Dell Computers (some of their product lines).

I know of several cheap motherboard brands e.g. Luckytech, Luckystar, Asrock (ASUS’s arm for cheap HW), Gigabyte, PCpartner, PCchips, Chaintech  and 'etc'.

With nForce I/II based chipsets the mobo brands they can range from the follows vendors;
. ABIT
· Albatron
· AOpen
· ASUS
· BIOSTAR
· Chaintech  
· DFI
· EPoX
· FIC
· Gigabyte
· Jetway
· Leadtek
· MSI
· Shuttle
· Soltek
(mobo list from nforcershq.com)
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 17, 2003, 03:19:32 AM
Quote
What kind of motherboard brands are they using (specifically your motherboard type)?


I honestly don't know. :oops: It's embarassing, but I don't have a clue. I'd have to boot the machine to look, and it's 3am. But judging by the drivers downloadable from the Time support site, it's most likely Gigabyte, MSI or Intel.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Hammer on June 17, 2003, 04:27:18 AM
Quote
But the performance impact of these things shouldn't really cause XP to be so slow.

They do actually, especially on VIA based chipsets.  
It could be the differences between capturing real time TV capturing without dropping a frame VS dropping alot of frames. This is especially  true on the older VIA chipsets.

Not much of a problem with nForce II since I’m personally still using MS WinXP's UDMA IDE drivers).
 
Quote
UDMA66/100 cabling: Don't know.

You can know your UDMA mode via
"Press Windows key + Pause key" -> click to "Hardware" tab->  click to "Device manager" button -> click right button mouse "Properties" menu (on top of "IDE ATA/ATAPI controllers") -> "Advance Settings" tab.

My current nForce II box’s UDMA mode is at 'Ultra DMA Mode 5**'. The MSI 6330 V3.5 box is also operating (remote desktop access) at 'Ultra DMA Mode 5' (this is via  the old VIA 686B southbridge
;-) ).  

** Slower slave UDMA100 HD was fitted on the same IDE channel (due to personal file transfers). It should be at 'Ultra DMA Mode 6'.

What about yours?

Judging from your Athlon (I’m guessing it's a Thunderbird core) 1.3 Ghz’s (without over clock) age and your chipset is VIA, one could guess that your VIA chipset would be in region of KT133x or KT266x. Unless you recently upgraded to VIA KT333x/KT400 class.  VIA KT400A has substantially improved due to Nvidia's nForce II competition.

Does your Athlon box uses DDR SDRAM or normal SDRAM?

Quote
MS Boot'Vis: No.

This is a free MS utility that optimises your XP setup i.e. in regards to boot time and how many NT services should be turned on.  

Quote
Memory timings: Don't know.

Where does one begin? One could write pages on this topic. This is related to your BIOS settings.

Quote
Time probably gave me two 64MB DIMMS, or even worse, four 32MB ones. I'd need to buy at least 128MB DIMM. It's too costly a step for me, considering it's not even my computer. And I have no idea what kind to buy, or whether they'd conflict with my current ones...

But you bought a Pegy?????(I think you did...).   Was your Pegy pre-configured?  Did you assemble this by yourself?
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Karlos on June 17, 2003, 12:26:28 PM
To be fair, Kenny, your PC system does sound a bit screwed up, considering I actually had WinXP (Pro) running on a 5 year old K6-II 350 with 128Mb (100MHz FSB) at one point.

It wasn't the fastest set up, but waiting a minute for IE6, well, that's taking the p*ss somewhat. Maybe 5-15 seconds, but a minute?

To strangle an 1.3G Athlon back to slower performance than that old PC sould take some seriously bad hardware or software conflicts.

Win2K sp3 was perfectly usable on the machine (after adding a bit more RAM). Booting took a bit longer than I would have liked though ;-)
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: on June 17, 2003, 01:11:14 PM
@Kenny

My missus is a customer services manager at Time Head Office.  PM me and I'll get it sorted for you.

and your right, their Tech Support is sh!t.  They pay the people that do it £10,400 per year and you don't have to know about computers to get a job doing it!

That is the main reason why the Customer Service dept are overworked with complaints, as the tech support blokes are thick.  She's been there 5 years, I honestly don't know why she stays!

The people that build them are even worse, not one single employee in the build centre speaks english apart from the manager!
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: mikeymike on June 17, 2003, 03:47:42 PM
@ mdma

You have to wonder whether some people go into business to deliver the worst service possible and still make a profit.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Aegis on June 17, 2003, 04:27:12 PM
Time PCs do suck... most of the components are junk. The only branded PCs I'll use are Dell - and whilst the build quality is pretty good even they drive me crazy 'cause Dell uses lots of non-standard design practices - Non ATX motherboards, customised Intel chipsets, simplified BIOS etc.

The only good PC is one you build yourself...  :-)
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 17, 2003, 04:45:13 PM
Well, I have still no idea of my motherboard brand or revision. The PC's Device Manager doesn't help and I got no maunuals or drivers with the PC. However, most controllers on the board are VIA.

Quote
You can know your UDMA mode via
"Press Windows key + Pause key" -> click to "Hardware" tab-> click to "Device manager" button -> click right button mouse "Properties" menu (on top of "IDE ATA/ATAPI controllers") -> "Advance Settings" tab.


Ok, running at Ultra DMA Mode 5. HD access still uses up all CPU time, though. The system seems to work great, until VM kicks in some minutes of use after booting. Then it's goodbye to any form of speed. Even downloading something makes it impossible to do anything else. It's like using non-DMA, to be honest.

Quote
Does your Athlon box uses DDR SDRAM or normal SDRAM?


Almost certainly non-DDR. I can't verify this though.

Quote
(about memory speed settings) This is related to your BIOS settings.


Since I got not motherboard or BIOS manual, I'm forced to leave these settings well alone. There's nothing much I can do, anyway, since most of the memory settings are ghosted and can't be changed.

Quote
But you bought a Pegy?????(I think you did...). Was your Pegy pre-configured? Did you assemble this by yourself?


The Pegasos Open Firmware "BIOS" was pre-configured and optimised by bPlan for the Pegasos-1 and has no obvious hardware settings anyway. It's not like a PC BIOS that has to support hundreds of different configurations. It's just a matter of finding DIMMs and AGP/PCI cards that work, then the machine is fully optimised the moment you turn it on.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Casper on June 17, 2003, 05:04:37 PM
Quote
To be fair, Kenny, your PC system does sound a bit screwed up, considering I actually had WinXP (Pro) running on a 5 year old K6-II 350 with 128Mb (100MHz FSB) at one point.


Yes, I've used Windows XP on a similar setup (K6-II 450, 384Mb) and it was nowhere near the slowness KennyR describes. On that system IE6 loaded in less than 1 second, and that computer was several times slower than an Athlon. Actually, I tried a lot of Windows versions on that machine and XP (with the candy look disabled) was actually the fastest on it, faster than both Win95, ME and 2000, especially when running games.

I've run Win2000 on a 64Mb P133, and that was still faster than what Kenny describes.

Something must have gone horribly wrong with XP on that machine, I'd try a complete reinstall.

WinXP on my 1.8GHz Pentium IV 512Mb rdram is actually more responsive now than my old AGA A1200 with a 060 is, even with the candy stuff turned on (I still prefer AOS though).
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Casper on June 17, 2003, 05:20:46 PM
Quote
For example, after booting, with no additional apps, my Win2K is using over 100M of ram according to task manager. What for, for f*cks sake? I have all non essential services turned off and the others set to load when required).
It's unreal. I can watch the CPU usage jump over 50% just typing into this window.


That's one of the great mysteries of Windows :-). And the more RAM you have to more it will use. My theory is that it does a lot of caching to memory of something. I've done a few tests and it seems like you get a lot of it back if you need it (i.e. you run something that's very memory intensive).

Watching the CPU usage in the task manager isn't a very accurate way to determine the load on your computer. Windows does a lot of maintenance stuff (such as defragging memory etc) on low priority when it's idle, so that's probably what you see. If you start using something more CPU intensive it will stop doing these things and devote more CPU time to that.

(my god, I'm starting to look like a windows fan boy :-) )
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 17, 2003, 05:27:27 PM
Quote
mdma wrote:

My missus is a customer services manager at Time Head Office. PM me and I'll get it sorted for you.


Pointless now, the machine is long past its 1 year warranty. And what really pisses me off is that the DVD-ROM/CDRW/CD-ROM combo drive broke after a few months since purchase, and they ignored any attempts from us to get it replaced under warranty. We phoned twice on their £1 a minute support hotline, only two have them tell us that it was a driver conflict and to update drivers, even though it needed no drivers! £15 down the drain, and we had to buy a new drive anyway, which was not cheap by any means.

Time Computers are thieves. Don't ever buy anything from them.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Hammer on June 20, 2003, 02:33:26 AM
Quote
Well, I have still no idea of my motherboard brand or revision. The PC's Device Manager doesn't help and I got no maunuals or drivers with the PC. However, most controllers on the board are VIA.

What about SiSandra2003?  

Quote
Ok, running at Ultra DMA Mode 5. HD access still uses up all CPU time, though.

Sounds like a VIA KT class chipset. At least VIA KT133A. IF your motherboard's PCB colour has a pink/reddish in colour, it’s certainly (or a good bet) a MSI built motherboard.

I don’t think Intel will manufacture X86 motherboards for the Athlon CPU series. That's leave us just the Gigabyte brand.

Quote
Almost certainly non-DDR. I can't verify this though.

Can you write down the BIOS text*** after the Video's BIOS initiations? (Press the pause/break key to pause).

**During initial memory checking phase.

For example, one of my old test machine has the following output

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Award Modular BIOS v6.00PG  , An Energy Star Ally
Copyright (C) 1984-2002, Award Software, Inc

W6330 v3.6 100702 10:00:51

Main Processor : AMD Athlon(tm) 1400 Mhz
Memory Testing :  524288 OK

Primary Master :  Sony CD-RW CRX140E 1.0n
Primary Slave  :  Samsung DVD SD-616F F103
Secondary Master  :  ST360011A
Secondary Slave  : Maxtor 2B020h1 WAH21PB0

Press DEL to setup SETUP

10/07/2002-8363-686B-6A6LMM4AC-00
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This immediately tell us the following.

1."W6330" relates to MSI-6330 (this is true for other MSI based boards e.g. MSI-3xxx). This directly related to MSI's user manual PDF downloads.
2. "v3.6" is the BIOS revision. May also relates to motherboard revision e.g. this board is 6330 V3.  
3. "100702" is date for BIOS's build creation.
4. I have to decode "8363-6A6LM4AC-00" from a utility.

Quote
Since I got not motherboard or BIOS manual, I'm forced to leave these settings well alone. There's nothing much I can do, anyway, since most of the memory settings are ghosted and can't be changed.

Some memory settings may rely from another setting for it to be turned on.  Refer to the above.

Quote
The Pegasos Open Firmware "BIOS" was pre-configured and optimised by bPlan for the Pegasos-1 and has no obvious hardware settings anyway.
.

I thought this board is aimed at the enthusiasts/tinker market...(sigh)...  
 
Quote

It's not like a PC BIOS that has to support hundreds of different configurations.

The reason for case is for catering different users. Everybody has different needs and wants. The amount of tweaking capability is the results from intense X86 motherboard competition e.g. some manufactures use this as a marketing tool.

Quote

It's just a matter of finding DIMMs and AGP/PCI cards that work, then the machine is fully optimised the moment you turn it on.

On ASUS nForce II based motherboard it has several general BIOS profiles** e.g. aggressive, optimal, safe and ‘etc’.

For motherboard user manuals refer to (without knowing your BIOS's boot text).

http://uk.giga-byte.com/Motherboard/Support/Manual/Manual_Socket+A.htm

http://www.msi.com.tw/program/products/mainboard/mbd/pro_mbd_list.php?kind=1&CHIP=17&NAME=Archives
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: jeffimix on June 20, 2003, 03:16:00 AM
I got a 1.4 Ghz(P4) Sony vaio, did a clean install of windows Xp to replace ME (DSL software wouldn't install because I had a DVD player... yeah M.e. was that bad) It's got a 32MbR Geforce2Mx, 128 Megs of RAM. Xp seems to run just fine, optimized for prettiness minus the fact I use 'classic' style. I've never done anything too fancy to it either, just the normal killing of background tasks, and things that load at log in. If this is slow, I wanna Peg, or A1 with OS4...
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: KennyR on June 20, 2003, 02:58:40 PM
@Hammer

Quote
(About the motherboard brand) What about SiSandra2003?


It doesn't sound familiar, and the year is not possible. The machine is from 2001.

Quote
Sounds like a VIA KT class chipset. At least VIA KT133A. IF your motherboard's PCB colour has a pink/reddish in colour, it's certainly (or a good bet) a MSI built motherboard.


Nope, I saw it when I installed a CD-RW after the DVD combo drive stopped reading CDs. It's standard green.

Anyway, my BIOS text is:

Award Modular BIOS v6.00PG, An Energy Star Ally
Copyright (C) 1984-2000, Award Software Inc.

W6378MS V1.5 081601 14:51:57 (Time Computer Systems)

Main Processor : AMD Athlon(tm) 1333MHz
Memory Testing : 122880K OK + 8192K Shared Memory

Primary Master : ST320410A 3.35
Primary Slave : None
Secondary Master : Toshiba DVD-ROM SD-R1002 1038
Secondary Slave : CW078D ATAPI CD-R/RW V102D

08/16/2001-8361-686B-6A6LMM4SC-00

---------

There are only a few memory settings in the BIOS. and even those very limited. Even my P200's BIOS from 1996 has more. But here they are:

Bank Interleave : Disabled
DRMA Timing by SPD : Yes
SDRAM CAS Latency : Auto*
DRAM/Clock : Auto*

(* - ghosted)

All BIOS are set to uncached (and unshadowed), apart from Video BIOS.

Quote
I thought this board (the Pegasos) is aimed at the enthusiasts/tinker market...(sigh)...


To be fair, the target for the Pegasos is multiple OS's, including MacOS. Macs use OpenFirmware as well, so you can see the reason they picked it. Also, Articia-S is set to a solid 100MHz bus with 100MHz memory access, and has no real settings.
Title: Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
Post by: Hammer on June 22, 2003, 12:14:04 PM
@KennyR
Your "W6378MS" may refer to

http://www.msi.com.tw/program/products/mainboard/mbd/pro_mbd_detail.php?UID=411&MODEL=MS-6738

Product: KM2M Combo-L (MS-6738). Pink/Redish colour PCB**.

OR

http://www.msi.com.tw/program/products/mainboard/mbd/pro_mbd_detail.php?UID=22&MODEL=MS-6378

Product: "MS-6738". Green colour PCB. (This is most likely your motherboard, as stated by your mobo PCB's colour). This is the value edition of "KM2M Combo-L (MS-6738)**". One of MSI's value product line up.

The "MS-6738" link includes;
1. BIOS updates (check your motherboard's revision and read the warnings before upgrading the BIOS).
2. User manuals
3. Drivers
4. 'etc'.

Your motherboard spec.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Chipset  
 VIA® VT8361A chipset (552BGA) Chipset
- FSB @ 100 / 133 (200/266)MHz
- Integrated Trident Blade 2D/3D video accelerator
- PCI advanced high performance memory controller
- Support PC 100/133 SDRAM, VCM & ESDRAM technology

VIA® VT82C686A / 686B (352BGA) Chipset
- Enhanced Power Management Features
- Integrated Super I/O (FDC, LPT, COM 1/2 and IR)
- Dual bus Master IDE Ultra DMA 33/66 (686B supports up to  Ultra DMA 100)
- Integrated Hardware Soundblaster
- Direct Sound AC97 Audio
- ACPI  
FSB  
    Support 100/133MHz(200/266MHz Internal System Bus)  
Main Memory  
    - Supports four memory banks using two 168-pin unbuffered
   DIMM.
- Supports a maximum memory size of 1GB (256MB DRAM
   technology).
- Supports 3.3v SDRAM DIMM.
- NO support ECC Function.
Slots  
    * One CNR (Communication Network Riser) slot
* Three 32-bit Master PCI Bus slots
  -- Support 3.3V/5V PCI bus Interface
* One ISA bus slot (optional)
 
On-Board IDE  
    - An IDE controller on the VIA® VT82C686A/686B chipset
   provides IDE HDD/CD-ROM with PIO, Bus Master and Ultra
   DMA 33/66 operation modes (686B can support up to Ultra   DMA 100)
- Can connect up to four IDE devices  
Audio  
    • Audio controller integrated in 686A/686B chipset
- Software audio codec ALC100
- Onboard Front Audio Pin Header (optional)  
Video  
    Integrated Trident Blade 2D / 3D Video Acclerator  
Network (optional)
-- Realtek 8100  
 
On-Board Peripherals  
    On-Board Peripherals include:
-- 1 Floppy port supports 2 FDD with 360K, 720K, 1.2M, 1.44M
   and 2.88Mbytes.
-- 1 Serial port (COM 1)
-- 1 Parallel port supports SPP/EPP/ECP mode
-- 4 USB ports
   (2 rear connectors and 1 USB front pin header- 2 ports)
-- 1 IrDA connector for SIR/CIR/FIR/ASKIR/HPSIR
-- 1 Audio/Game port
-- 1 VGA port  
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The shared memory with CPU and GPU (plus with other I/O operations)  may lead to slight performance degradations  (e.g. bus contentions). This set-up kind of setup will severely cripple the Athlon’s performance. Similar issues when MC680x0 shares its memory/bus with Amiga’s custom chips.

It should be enough for Windows XP(with sufficient memory).

It’s recommended that one should find at least PCI Geforce 2/Geforce4 MX/ Radeon 7500 for maximising your system set-up (i.e. an attempt to free up the main bus for the CPU).

Squeezing 1.3Ghz Athlon, GPU and other I/O operations into 133Mhz SDRAM’s bandwidth is crazy….  
Quote
08/16/2001-8361-686B-6A6LMM4SC-00

From memory;
1. "6A6LM" = VIA KT(KM)133 chipset class.
2. "M4" = Micro-star (a.k.a MSI).

Quote
It doesn't sound familiar, and the year is not possible. The machine is from 2001.

It’s a system info utility for the Windows platform.