Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: PPC is bad bad bad  (Read 34445 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

  • Guest
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #119 from previous page: May 05, 2002, 08:02:33 AM »
keep the topic alive
 

Offline Tigger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 1890
    • Show only replies by Tigger
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #120 on: May 05, 2002, 08:11:21 AM »
>>As I said in my original post I have NOT seen a >>RECENT benchmark were the fastest PPC renders >>quicker than an x86 machine. I guess that would >>include an '060 also.

The Dual 1 Ghz Apple systems (fastest available, cost 3K) dont even make the 10 fastest list, a single P4 2.2 Ghz gives identical speeds, which of those systems is cheaper??  The P4 by a large margin.  

>>Sorry I thought you were familiar with Lightwave >>on the Amiga.
I am very familiar with Lightwave on the Amiga, I will never go back to rendering on a system as slow as the amiga or even as slow as the new A1, I went past the render speed of a single 600Mhz G3, 3 years ago, I am not going back there so I can say I am using an "Amiga".

>>"Renders are not shown at their true resolution >>as they are rendered."                         >>On the Amiga the render rendered on another >>screen in the correct resolution, no slowdown of >>the renderer and in a                      >>screen res and colour depth configured by the >>user. Currently the rendering screen can only >>have 3 selections; Off, 320x240 or 640x480.

First of all you most definitely can preview at larger sizes, secondly you can render to a toaster display getting to an NTSC or PAL preview if you would like (as most of us do).

>>"The object cannot move while being modeled."
>> The sentence says "cannot move" NOT, cannot BE >>MOVED. On the Amiga the 3D perspective view >>ossilated as/while/at the same time as, the user >>modelled.

You can spin the preview all you want on the PC while you model, what exactly do you think it missing???

>>Your original post seemed to suggest to use x86 >>rather than PPC. Although I understand your view >>I also understand that the AmigaOS can better >>use the resorces of a PPC than a Win machine, >>even though it runs at a greater Mhz rate

The issue is that despite Apples best effort at a making a slimmer/faster OS then Windows, and them using the fastest available PPC's (G4) (and even dual), they are still slower at rendering then x86s running windows.   So implying that a single 600Mhz G3 running AmigaOS will be not only faster then the Dual G4 1Ghz Apple but faster then X86 is a pretty strange theory.
    -Tig    
Well you know I am scottish, so I like sheep alot.
     -Fleecy Moss, Gateway 2000 show
 

  • Guest
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #121 on: May 05, 2002, 08:17:27 AM »
ossilated?...you like haveing a jumpy screen while modelling....most of us dont
 

  • Guest
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #122 on: May 05, 2002, 09:43:26 AM »
back in the top spot again woohoo
 

  • Guest
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #123 on: May 05, 2002, 11:31:09 AM »
stayin alive ..staying alive..wooo hooo hooo hooo..stayinnnn aliiiiiiiive
 

Offline Alkemyst

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 494
    • Show only replies by Alkemyst
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #124 on: May 05, 2002, 01:07:05 PM »
i dont know why ppl are still arguing about ppc & x86.

the path has been chosen & there is nothing any of us can do about it atm.

just like fighting over wich party is in power , you make your vote & thats it you have to wait 4 to
5 years in the uk to change
the ppl in power.

it no good missing the deadline to vote then start moaning about the ppl in power you had your chance
but like alot of ppl cant be botherd to get of there ass & vote. then a week after moan & say that
75% population who satt on there asses  wanted the other party.

& even if that were true the 75% would not be able to change the ppl in power untill the next time.
so you end up with ppl in power that only 25% of the ppl wanted.

its not the 25% ppls fault but the fault of the 75% who should of cast there vote when they had the
chance.

now as far ppl saying that amiga should of gone x86 this time around, its too late you should of
spoken up much sooner.
many amiga ppl knew for a very long time that amiga had a 80% chance of going ppc, as phase5 made
amigappc cards.

its seems to me that most of the for x86 ppl have not been keeping an eye on the amiga scene & have
been spending most of there time on windows & linux, thinking that the amiga is dead.

then amiga.inc,eyetech.hyperion, & others start to do things again, then the amigaone/aos4 is
announced

& still no word from the x86 ppl they dont keep up on the amiga scence.

then things move on to point where that things look like it may be really happening & its not just
vapor & then non amiga sites start to mention whats going on & there will most likelly be new amiga
products, so the x86 ppl get wind of that
& go & see what the new amiga & os spec is & then think oh damn its not useing a x86 as i had hoped,
or even if it was useing x86 would then moan that its a custom mobo useing x86 & that they wanted to
use amigaos on the x86 mobo they already have.

so then they flood into forums & try to give valid reasons why amiga should go x86 & not ppc, weather
they are right or wrong does not matter, they are to late this time around.

just like when apple had to move on from the 68k. i bet if most of the apple users asked for x86 at
the time before thing were set in stone, they most likely would of gotten it. even tho it would of
been a custom apple x86 computer.

all things change over time 68k,x86,ppc,arm,sparc, ..ect will not be around for ever, even if the
name stays the same the chip in years to come will be compleatly different.

just make sure that when its time to move cpu or anyother matter with amigaOs again, that your around
to cast your views when it matters & not after.
PowerTower A1200,060/80Mhz,Heatsink&Fan,66MBRam,PowerFlyerGold,50xCDRomdrive,250Zip,2.1GB&34GB HD,internal Scandoubler & FF,19\\"Monitor,Mediator,Voodoo3-3000,PaceSolo 56k ,PortJnr2,ZEKeys-XS,SMON ,Os3.9
 

Offline Kay

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 623
    • Show only replies by Kay
    • http://www.stud.ntnu.no/~kayare
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #125 on: May 05, 2002, 01:52:54 PM »
Well spoken, Alkemyst. You've got the point EXACTLY. If Phase5 had made x86 accellerators instead, and Hyperion were currently busy with AmigaOS4-x86, I would have supported that path as well.

Think of it as a fork in the road: The road you were walking will not take you further, and you have to choose between going left and going right. Both roads will eventually take you were you want to go, although one road might take longer than the other. Anyway, you have to choose, and once you have chosen, you better stick with that choice, unless you want to waste a lot of time walking back and forth. The Amiga has been walking down the PPC road for some time now. Those who disagree with that choice should have made themselves heard when we were at the fork.

Time to calm down, accept the state of things, and support the efforts that are currently being made to breathe some life into the walking corpse that is Amiga.

Kay
 

Offline Valan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 173
    • Show only replies by Valan
    • http://www.creativepixels.com.hk
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #126 on: May 05, 2002, 05:04:23 PM »
As I said in my original post I have [color=FF3300] NOT[/color] seen a RECENT benchmark were the fastest PPC renders quicker than an x86 machine. I guess that would include an '060 also.

The Dual 1 Ghz Apple systems (fastest available, cost 3K) dont even make the 10 fastest list, a single P4 2.2 Ghz gives identical speeds, which of those systems is cheaper?? The P4 by a large margin.

Sounds like you agreeing with me??
Glad to hear it!!

I am very familiar with Lightwave on the Amiga, I will never go back to rendering on a system as slow as the amiga or even as slow as the new A1, I went past the render speed of a single 600Mhz G3, 3 years ago, I am not going back there so I can say I am using an "Amiga".

Oops, Please re-read my first comment. You will see that I said the x86 are much faster.

First of all you most definitely can preview at larger sizes,
Wow, so how?

secondly you can render to a toaster display getting to an NTSC or PAL preview if you would like (as most of us do).
Oh, so I need a Toaster, right? Hmmm, thought about getting one but not for render previews.

You can spin the preview all you want on the PC while you model, what exactly do you think it missing???

Since you are very familiar with Lightwave on the Amiga you should know that the Perspective view oscillated automatically as you model. You seem to have forgotten, but then it has been gone for 2.5 versions and even more years.

The issue is that despite Apples best effort at a making a slimmer/faster OS then Windows, and them using the fastest available PPC's (G4) (and even dual), they are still slower at rendering then x86s running windows. So implying that a single 600Mhz G3 running AmigaOS will be not only faster then the Dual G4 1Ghz Apple but faster then X86 is a pretty strange theory.

Although this is your only sensible reply you still fail to remember the knowledge you gained from using an Amiga.

The idea that AmigaOS can use the resources of the PPC far better than ApplesOSX is an everyday fact rather than theory.

OSX is now only marginally faster than OS9.x. As all users with accellerated Amigas know, AmigaOS can emulate the Mac OS at very near 1:1 speed while doing other tasks.

As I have already said I think rendering will be slower using PPC but all else may well be much faster.

Valan

 

Offline yssing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 1517
    • Show only replies by yssing
    • http://www.yssing.org
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #127 on: May 05, 2002, 05:28:10 PM »
Personally if I were to rander at any system, I would not chosse x86 or PPC... maybe Silly GFX instead...
or a sun system...
although a wee bit more expensive....

Og hvis mit engelsk ikke er godt nok, så er mit dansk måske....

 

  • Guest
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #128 on: May 05, 2002, 05:49:35 PM »
G3 *G4 Rulez   68K For Ever !!!
I never wants to buy a PPC. Not enought support, and not enought power !
I need a A1G3   !

Please visit :
Amigaland !
 

  • Guest
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #129 on: May 06, 2002, 03:17:43 AM »
keep the topic alive....PPC is bad bad bad


  e         e        eeeee            eee
     e   e         E           e         e    
        e           e eeeee          eeee
   e        e     e            e        e      e
 e           e    eeeeeee        eeeee   4eva
 

  • Guest
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #130 on: May 06, 2002, 03:30:16 AM »
the main thing i want to say is that the people who sit and somehow find a way to defend the choice to use a slower more costly PPC and then beyond that lie either from ignorance or from the wanting to believe that  somehow with this wishy wash Amiga Magic powers or whatever that it will make the CPU(a scientifically defineable thing) able to render much faster....or make it capable of superior things. those people are denying themselves...the best post to read about amiga ive seen yet is on the forums  where a guy useing the name techzone_tron layed it right out in the open....

 Re: Is this going the way of ANN? How about active moderation?          
Having followed along the troll-fest here, I'll jump in and make a few observations.

As a former Amiga Dealer, Authorized Newtek reseller, Authorized Scala developer, believe me when I say there was a time when there was no platform that could realistically touch the Amiga's capabilities.

Roughly a decade+ later, with basically trickles of 3rd party support, the dwindling Amiga community lives on. And those who choose to continue to use Amiga's, well more power to them.

Technical arguments tend to turn into troll-fests unfortunately. There's little denying the truth of the situation, but it's kind of pointless to argue hardware issues, especially with people who do not truly understand what they're discussing.

For people who are interested in doing professional level 3D work, professional level video work, the Amiga as a platform is irrelavent. Sure there are those who continue to work on 3rd party expanded Amiga's, and continue to do well. But for anyone who doesnt already have a considerable investment in hardware, there's simply no reason to consider the Amiga.

As a past Amiga zealot, who still remembers the excitement of the platform, and the important milestones of the day (and no....going to AmiExpo's just so I could hit on Kiki Stockhammer while I was drunk doesnt count), I can perhaps relate better than many the frustrations felt with the lack of progress on the platform.

As a hobbyist endeavor, the Amiga still holds much appeal for many people. So does other similar endeavors revolving around classic computing. But as a viable, cost effective, and capable platform for professional use, the Amiga is dead, and has been for a long time.

Does that mean that I have abandoned it? No. But would I use it as a professional development platform for 3D work or video work, when the PC universe offers so much more power and capability for little %? Of course not, and no sane person could argue this......

My comments arent meant to be troll bait, just a realistic look at the situation from someone who has had much more experience with the Amiga, and the situation in general, than many who post here.


 
thats what he said and to me and anyone with commen sense it's hard to argue with his logic
 

Offline Panthro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 294
    • Show only replies by Panthro
    • http://www.hell-fish.tk
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #131 on: May 06, 2002, 03:56:06 AM »
Well now....

how ever I love those bench mark's I cant abide
Wintel!!  The G3 600mhz is the first machine in
years it is *JUST* to get us off of classic hardware
this is comman sense!!

PPC migh not be cheap but it is future proof.
The smart nove has been made do you think that
eyetech would have got support for a X86 amiga
mother board? :-P  LOL you seem to want X86 as
apposed to a alternative based on principal :-o  why
not just wait & see what happens? :-D  I recon on
there being much faster Hardware in the future ;-)
Meanwhile enjoy your PC I'm sure that your render
is generated in 3 seconds (drewl)   ..just as well
your sys would crash if it took any longer :-D  (JK)

I see your points I fix wintel all day long.........
I also see the A1 as therapy at the end of the day
after fixing wintel all day who wants to go home &
fix you own?

There will be Faster Amigas but not everybody renders try every day things! A G3 600mhz will do for now I think :-)

[ Edited by Panthro on 2002/5/6 12:20:12 ]
-Panthro
 

Offline JetFireDX

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 232
    • Show only replies by JetFireDX
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #132 on: May 06, 2002, 04:48:38 AM »
Wintel...there it goes again, the lack of definition between MS Windows and Intel x86 or AMD for that matter. The only reason PC's are the piles they are is because of WINDOWS! You don't hear Linux x86 users complaining about stability do you? No. Why? Because it is MS's fault that a PC can't run without an crash because the software running on it is garbage. AmigaOS is NOT garbage, and it will only be better with OS4, 5, 6, 22:-D...etc.. Thus is why I say I would love to see it on both, all, every CPU available, ala OS5. I don't even care if it is on a standard PC mobo, infact I hope not like the PPC AmigaONE's, there should/could (eventually) be a board with an x86 socket if you prefered it. But this argument that a PC is a pile of junk simply because of its CPU is absurd. A speedy PC is just that, its the bloated-slow-badly coded trash of an OS running on it that makes it bad. Unfortunately that is what most of us have to put up with now.

As far as voicing opinions way way back when the PPC boards started showing up, I don't recall one poll asking anybody what they wanted. (even if they asked then, we would have said PPC anyways) At the time, x86 was too slow to be used and Amiga users hated Intel because it represented the "other side" with Windows, so the natural choice was to simply avoid it. I highly doubt they could have forseen the x86 market exploding the way it did and the rather slow development of the PPC. But it is true, we are on this path and so we must follow it.

I will wait and see what users think of the AmigaONE's before I buy. If they are all saying "THIS ROCKS! It IS SOOOOO FAST!" I will get one, but if I hear otherwise I will wait until the next gen, or OS5 which ever comes first.
 

Offline AmigaMac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2002
  • Posts: 559
    • Show only replies by AmigaMac
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #133 on: May 06, 2002, 04:56:45 AM »
Actually the FUD being spread about PowerPC is pure crap.  I just ran across this piece just yesterday on IBM's new PowerPC breed, the 'POWER4' which has just won a major award for its effort in PowerPC design with its POWER4 CPU architecture which is beating both Intel and Compaq's Alpha at a considerable margin, which in affect the engineering tech will trickle down the pipe to the PowerPC brother no doubt.  IBM is also trying to break Moore's law with super clocking the PPC techno with some of their homebrew projects, and we all know how weird IBM can be with their experiments.  Here is a headline about IBM's latest accomplishments...

http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/020430/041372.html

[ Edited by AmigaMac on 2002/5/6 4:01:06 ]
 

  • Guest
Re: PPC is bad bad bad
« Reply #134 on: May 06, 2002, 05:04:45 AM »
and the power4 also has 8 processor cores...is the size of a baseball.uses 500watts of power....and costs more then a human clone.its not to say it isnt good engineering..but its over engineering..theirs no way any of us WILL EVER see a power4 sitting on a desktop.
and it should beat intel and alpha..considering they both use 1 processor core...1!!!! DERRR 1!!!!!....and both of them run on the desktop useing what? at most maybe 25 watts?...compared to 500 watts...
price of a Alpha bieng maybe 1000$ for the top of the line retail...price of the intel bieng what? 500$ top of the line...not to mention cost of running it....or cost of maintaining it...

the only thing FUD and 'pure crap' is your little ignorant rant....


[ Edited by mips_proc on 2002/5/5 21:05:44 ]

[ Edited by mips_proc on 2002/5/5 21:21:07 ]