Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Amiga Kit Amiga Store Iridium Banner AMIStore App Store A1200/A600 4xIDE Interface

AuthorTopic: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?  (Read 6799 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mikeymike

Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
« Reply #60 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) compared to any desktop computer (any OS) I've used, although I have never used a high-power Amiga (My Amiga specs).

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 :-)

Offline B00tDisk

  • VIP / Donor - Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2002
  • Posts: 1670
  • Total likes: 1
    • http://www.thedelversdungeon.com
Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
« Reply #61 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) compared to any desktop computer (any OS) I've used, although I have never used a high-power Amiga (My Amiga specs).


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!
Back away from the EU-SSR!
 

Offline mikeymike

Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
« Reply #62 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.


Offline Hammer

Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
« Reply #63 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.
AmigaForever 2016 with AmigaOS 4.1 FE, AMIDuOS\'s Android 5.01, MS Windows 10 Pro X64
Samsung ATIV Book 8 880Z5E laptop with touch screen.
CPU: Intel Core i7-3635QM, 2.4Ghz base, 3.4Ghz turbo.
RAM: 16 GB PC3-12800 (DDR3-1600)
GPU: AMD Radeon HD 8870M (OC) 2GB GDDR5 VRAM.
SSD: 512 GB Samsung 840
 

Offline Hammer

Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
« Reply #64 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.
AmigaForever 2016 with AmigaOS 4.1 FE, AMIDuOS\'s Android 5.01, MS Windows 10 Pro X64
Samsung ATIV Book 8 880Z5E laptop with touch screen.
CPU: Intel Core i7-3635QM, 2.4Ghz base, 3.4Ghz turbo.
RAM: 16 GB PC3-12800 (DDR3-1600)
GPU: AMD Radeon HD 8870M (OC) 2GB GDDR5 VRAM.
SSD: 512 GB Samsung 840
 

Offline KennyR

Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
« Reply #65 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.
 

Offline KennyR

Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
« Reply #66 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.
 

Offline Karlos

Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
« Reply #67 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?
int p; // A
 

Offline B00tDisk

  • VIP / Donor - Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2002
  • Posts: 1670
  • Total likes: 1
    • http://www.thedelversdungeon.com
Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
« Reply #68 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.
Back away from the EU-SSR!
 

Offline B00tDisk

  • VIP / Donor - Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2002
  • Posts: 1670
  • Total likes: 1
    • http://www.thedelversdungeon.com
Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
« Reply #69 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?
Back away from the EU-SSR!
 

Offline Hammer

Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
« Reply #70 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.
AmigaForever 2016 with AmigaOS 4.1 FE, AMIDuOS\'s Android 5.01, MS Windows 10 Pro X64
Samsung ATIV Book 8 880Z5E laptop with touch screen.
CPU: Intel Core i7-3635QM, 2.4Ghz base, 3.4Ghz turbo.
RAM: 16 GB PC3-12800 (DDR3-1600)
GPU: AMD Radeon HD 8870M (OC) 2GB GDDR5 VRAM.
SSD: 512 GB Samsung 840
 

Offline Karlos

Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
« Reply #71 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.
int p; // A
 

Offline KennyR

Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
« Reply #72 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.
 

Offline KennyR

Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
« Reply #73 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.
 

Offline KennyR

Re: Quake II on a 68060 @ 50Mhz?
« Reply #74 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.