Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Hardware Issues and discussion => Topic started by: Piru on January 26, 2011, 04:14:09 PM
-
In number crunching SAM 460 is barely as fast as the Pegasos2 G4@1GHz if you don't account for the altivec. If altivec is taken into account then G4@1GHz runs circles around the system. Granted, Sam460 has a faster memory interface, but the number crunching figures are quite disappointing.
Why is it that it's so hard to find SPECint and SPECfp figures for AMCC460? AMCC appears to only quote some DMIPS values which frankly are quite useless.
I would have expected a new HW to actually surpass the 6-7 year old one, especially considering the extremely high price of the system. Sam 440 systems were already pricey but this 460 takes it to a new level (900 eur).
Just because something is "new" doesn't make it better anymore.
-
I've heard that the 460 CPU is "cool". I'm not sure if that refers to it's heat dissipation or something else though.
-
Hmm, now that I think about it this thread might have a better home at "Amiga Hardware Issues and discussion". Mods: Move if you wish.
-
In number crunching SAM 460 is barely as fast as the Pegasos2 G4@1GHz if you don't account for the altivec. If altivec is taken into account then G4@1GHz runs circles around the system. Granted, Sam460 has a faster memory interface, but the number crunching figures are quite disappointing.
Why is it that it's so hard to find SPECint and SPECfp figures for AMCC460? AMCC appears to only quote some DMIPS values which frankly are quite useless.
I would have expected a new HW to actually surpass the 6-7 year old one, especially considering the extremely high price of the system. Sam 440 systems were already pricey but this 460 takes it to a new level (900 eur).
Just because something is "new" doesn't make it better anymore.
I guess it depends on what the SPECint/SPECfp figures are like from the A1X1K. I think that will be the defining moment for the SAM460. If it's close and the if retail A1X1K package is around 2K-2.2K EUROs, the SAM460 might be the big sales winner.
OTOH, 900 EUROs is mid level Alienware laptop range: http://www.dell.com/us/p/alienware-m15x/pd?refid=alienware-m15x&~ck=mn
-
Just because something is "new" doesn't make it better anymore.
It does make it available, however. Well, at least when the Sam460 is shipping to end AmigaOS users. That's worth a lot to me anyway.
-
...I would have expected a new HW to actually surpass the 6-7 year old one, especially considering the extremely high price of the system. Sam 440 systems were already pricey but this 460 takes it to a new level (900 eur).
Just because something is "new" doesn't make it better anymore.
give it time...the Sam460ex is a nice evolution of the Sam440ep and is only in existence because there was demand for the Sam440 which is a great sign for AmigaOS in general. ACube has given me great support with my Samflex@800 in the year and a half that I have owned it so there is great merit in buying new hardware from a respected supplier indeed.
-
It does make it available, however. Well, at least when the Sam460 is shipping to end AmigaOS users.
Ah indeed. It's 3 months (http://www.acube-systems.biz/img/highlight_pics/460.jpg) late already.
My guess is that they don't want to repeat the SAM 440 disaster where the OS experience was far from stellar.
-
Ah indeed. It's 3 months (http://www.acube-systems.biz/img/highlight_pics/460.jpg) late already.
My guess is that they don't want to repeat the SAM 440 disaster where the OS experience was far from stellar.
I'm sure potential customers are more than happy to wait a bit for a quality product from a respected supplier.
as for the launch of the Sam440, I would'nt call it a disaster by any stretch of the imagination, in less than a year we've seen 2 updates to AmigaOS4.1u2 and 3 patches/fixes from ACube that have made the Sam440/OS4.1 experience better and better each time.....again the merits of buying new products from a trusted supplier who is committed to providing future products.
-
The SAM460 should be a nice improvement over the SAM440.
I'm not sure its fair to compoare it to a used 1Ghz Pegasos anymore than it would be fair to compare the same Pegasos to my 1.8 Ghz Powermac.
All are fast enough to do what they need to do. After all, Amiga related software isn't that demanding.
You want power? Wait for G5 support under MorphOS or hope that a SAM465 is created.
-
Im guessing Piru doesn't need to wait :)
-
Im guessing Piru doesn't need to wait :)
understatement of the year:) hey but never say never..one day he might be running MOS on a new Sam475:razz:
-
I meant for G5 support :)
-
Having owned a Peg 2 and a sam 440, can anyone guess which one I sold?
Gaz
-
Having owned a Peg 2 and a sam 440, can anyone guess which one I sold?
Gaz
i went crazy at one time trying to find a used PegII but I can honestly say I don't regret buying a brand new Sam:)
-
Having owned a Peg 2 and a sam 440, can anyone guess which one I sold?
Gaz
Uh, let's see. They both run Amiga OS 4,1 and the Peg will also run MorphOS. Plus the Peg is faster.
So you kept the SAM, right? :roflmao:
-
I'm quite happy with my SAM 440, but I am also not delusional enough to think that in sane terms I got the best bang for my buck with it. I could have built 2 fairly nice midrange gaming pc's for what I have sunk into the SAM rig.
At the time, it was the most powerful "Amiga" available for purchase from a retailer, and I like OS 4. That being said, it doesn't even remotely come close to doing what I expect a modern PC to do as far as being a computer I'd solely use for every day to day tasks. High costs on these modern gen "Amiga's" will always be an issue, and the availability of cheap macs and MorphOS is often a more viable option than the OS4 rigs, sadly. Same goes for AROS and old commodity PC HW. Just not enough manufacturer volume to make the new PPC OS4 rigs affordable to most people.
Performance vs. cost on this stuff is sort of redundant as a comparison, no one is buying them for a daily driver unless your needs are far less demanding than most peoples. I enjoy my SAM for a vague nostalgia factor, enjoy the lack of noise it emits, but in all truth my iphone does more than the SAM does in the "modern computing" aspect for me. I love the SAM, but I'm fully aware of its' limitations, I suppose. No one twisted my arm to buy it at the steep price that I paid for it.
-
As frustrated as I sometimes feel myself getting waiting for these products, I keep trying to tell myself that months are like minutes in Amiga time.
-
I don't mind that new amigas has poor performance. Price is different thing, it should be possible to build this kind of system so that price would be 200-300€
I think that Efica has prove that.
Price was 99€, it would have been perfect hobby machine, IF there would had been memory socket, to make possible to add more memory.
Surely to add memory socket would make more cost, but ...
-
I've heard that the 460 CPU is "cool". I'm not sure if that refers to it's heat dissipation or something else though.
Well, the Sam 460ex's CPU is passively cooled. I have one of these machines and the only fan in the case belongs to the power supply. It's by far the quietest machine that I have.
I like the Sam 460ex. I like the faster RAM, the faster 4x PCIe bus, and the passively cooled Radeon HD 4650 that I have connected to it. The 4x PCIe bus definitely makes a difference.
It would be nice if they could bring the price down though.
Hans
-
Uh, let's see. They both run Amiga OS 4,1 and the Peg will also run MorphOS. Plus the Peg is faster.
So you kept the SAM, right? :roflmao:
i guess hes sold both..;D
-
i guess hes sold both..;D
At current prices I would have and bought a Powermac.
-
Well, the Sam 460ex's CPU is passively cooled. I have one of these machines and the only fan in the case belongs to the power supply. It's by far the quietest machine that I have.
I like the Sam 460ex. I like the faster RAM, the faster 4x PCIe bus, and the passively cooled Radeon HD 4650 that I have connected to it. The 4x PCIe bus definitely makes a difference.
It would be nice if they could bring the price down though.
Hans
I actually find that combination interesting. I wish it cost less, but I could see that as a daily use machine. Ther SAM460 is a significantly better board than the SAM 440. If I could put up with a 933 Mhz Powermac (the speed of my processor before upgrading) I could easily see using a 1.15Ghz machine.
Since this is faster than most Pegasos', how is it slow?
-
With some good will Sam460 (895 EUR) is maybe in the class of Atom based mainboards(59 EUR), but for about *15* (!) times the price. For 300EUR I'd say it would be a fair offer. Yeah, sure, low volume production and such, but hence the 300 EUR.
Atom board: http://shop.e-bug.de/shop/product_info.php?info=p238816&refID=FR
Sam460: http://www.vesalia.de/d_sam460ex.htm
-
I never understood the fascination with power pc, or people's insistance to stay on it. Sure it would be a nice option if the price was competitive with other similar performing platforms, but its not. (with morphos it is!)
While other platforms get faster, amiga os4 platforms stay more or less the same speed... Unless x1000 ever comes out but with an extra core thats useless... Who cares?
You are paying tons extra to have so much less performance, oh and lets not get started on the browsing experience of os4.
paying 1000$ for a 700mhz computer and os is just crazy. My android phone cost 200$ and is 1ghz dual core. Browsing is better on my android too, and it can of course use both cores.
And another thing, os4 is last on my list after aros and morphos.
Sam 460 is just another letdown from the os4 camp. I'm a huge amiga fan, but I will likely NEVER have an os4 machine. They are just too slow and
os4 is just too shitty to justify that kind of expense.
Steven
-
I never understood the fascination with power pc, or people's insistance to stay on it. Sure it would be a nice option if the price was competitive with other similar performing platforms, but its not. (with morphos it is!)
While other platforms get faster, amiga os4 platforms stay more or less the same speed... Unless x1000 ever comes out but with an extra core thats useless... Who cares?
You are paying tons extra to have so much less performance, oh and lets not get started on the browsing experience of os4.
paying 1000$ for a 700mhz computer and os is just crazy. My android phone cost 200$ and is 1ghz dual core. Browsing is better on my android too, and it can of course use both cores.
And another thing, os4 is last on my list after aros and morphos.
Sam 460 is just another letdown from the os4 camp. I'm a huge amiga fan, but I will likely NEVER have an os4 machine. They are just too slow and
os4 is just too shitty to justify that kind of expense.
Steven
But we already know your opinion Steven. I can't explain why i'm holding on to PPC. The prices are high. If someone manages to port AROS to the PS3, we will have our first low cost PPC system since the Efika ended production,
I'm happy with the performabce of my 1.8 Ghz 7447A, Its definitely superior to an Atom. And I've got a line on a 2.5 Ghz G5 which will definately boost performance.
I'm going tp leave X86 to the AROS crowd (even if it means they get the top performing CPUs).
But we ought to be looking at ARM. The prices are low, the performance is adequate for our needs, and (more importantly) its not X86.
-
Yes I hope they port to arm too. I will be the first to buy os4 for arm if its available on low cost hardware like the beagleboard or similar...
-
So what happens when Hyperion surprises everyone and supports Mac Mini G4, under cutting all of this Alt-Amiga stuff? They make the OS, not the hardware. Would it not be in their interest to sell copies of their OS?
Or is the money being made on the hardware-relationship with Acube? All very weird.
-
Uh, let's see. They both run Amiga OS 4,1 and the Peg will also run MorphOS. Plus the Peg is faster.
So you kept the SAM, right? :roflmao:
LOL
I kept the peg, having sold the Sam when OS4 was announced for the peg but I was so disappointed with OS4 on the Sam I never bothered to buy it.
I actually felt that my 3000 and 4000 running 3.9 were a step up from OS4, at least they have USB support that doesn't destroy data and drives, and have USB2 speed. Morphos just feel light years ahead.
I like the Sam hardware but it is far to expensive, and its only use outside Acube's industrial market is as a hardware dongle for OS4. I just hope that the industrial customers aren't lumbered with Uboot, IMHO the worst boot manager its ever been my misfortune to use.
Gaz
-
So what happens when Hyperion surprises everyone and supports Mac Mini G4, under cutting all of this Alt-Amiga stuff? They make the OS, not the hardware. Would it not be in their interest to sell copies of their OS?
Or is the money being made on the hardware-relationship with Acube? All very weird.
I think Ben Hermans (http://www.biclodon.com/misc/amigafarm/benhermans/) wants to sell you both (http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=30985&forum=42) hardware and operating system.
-
I think Ben Hermans (http://www.biclodon.com/misc/amigafarm/benhermans/) wants to sell you both (http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=30985&forum=42) hardware and operating system.
Ah gawd, after reading, it's like they're pissing in the wind. All people want is a mac mini AOS4 machine. Why they go through all this trouble I can't understand. Just a few drivers and install issues away from Valhalla, so frustrating.
"A. To be honest it’s a labour of love for some of the A-EON founders (mentioning no names), however we still believe there is a real demand for high-end Amiga computers."
WRONG. How about one that just works good, and then we can talk about uber machines later. Crawl, walk, run, last I checked, was the way to get somewhere.
-
Ah gawd, after reading, it's like they're pissing in the wind. All people want is a mac mini AOS4 machine. Why they go through all this trouble I can't understand. Just a few drivers and install issues away from Valhalla, so frustrating.
"A. To be honest it’s a labour of love for some of the A-EON founders (mentioning no names), however we still believe there is a real demand for high-end Amiga computers."
WRONG. How about one that just works good, and then we can talk about uber machines later. Crawl, walk, run, last I checked, was the way to get somewhere.
How about a powerful LOW cost Amiga derivative. I'm with Steven on this. ARM boards cost under $200. Where's the NG OS for these?
-
WRONG. How about one that just works good, and then we can talk about uber machines later. Crawl, walk, run, last I checked, was the way to get somewhere.
Well they got the crawling part spot on with the sam ep ;)
-
Well they got the crawling part spot on with the sam ep ;)
Yeah, but that was already done with the Efika (at a much lower cost).
-
"A demand" is actually about ten people. They are just wishful thinking that several hundred more people will pay that ridiculous price.
What is up with the delays? In everywhere else land products ship on time, 95% of the time.
-
Yeah, but that was already done with the Efika (at a much lower cost).
Exactly. They are on some dark quest, it will all end in tears I'm afraid. I was reading the court exhibts, stuff in there about the mini, they were trying to go there at one point "to allows us to open up new markets"...
-
Ah gawd, after reading, it's like they're pissing in the wind. All people want is a mac mini AOS4 machine. Why they go through all this trouble I can't understand. Just a few drivers and install issues away from Valhalla, so frustrating.
Well, there is a good alternative OS for the Mac mini available - it's calles MorphOS. IMHO way better than OS4. Okay, OS4's everyday usability is catching up since Fab helps to port his OWB browser to OS4. But why waiting for the wannabe, when you can use the original?
-
Breaking news - hardware for AmigaOS is expensive! :O
-
Breaking news - hardware for AmigaOS is expensive! :O
Heh... I was thinking low cost of entry was one the things that originally attracted me to the amiga, of course you also had options if you wanted more. But then it wasn't AmigaOS back then.
-
ive bought mine first (600er) in 90 or 91 after few years of complete computer abstinence (except for a speccy i had) and remembering a great rush when amiga come out. in poland 1985 it was of course beyond a dream for practically everybody, and here ive got one for a bargain price equivalent of maybe 150eur today. i had a little money left but i could not resist, a pc was much more an investment.. so yes, it was still a very good entry level that kept me loyal to amiga for years to come, despite its all misfortune.
-
Sam460EX is a way to give new HW (instead of clunky old one) to the AmigaOS, Altivec isn't used in Amiga software at the moment (with the sole exeption of mplayer) so it's basically irrelevant.
What's more to like is the faster memory interface, and the chance of going beyond PCI or AGP old-coot GFX cards (and yes new 3D subsystem and drivers to support all this are coming).
The whole project is very cool for AmigaOS aficionados, if you prefer something else go buy it, nobody will stop you ;-)
Ah! And to those who believe they have a better idea, go do it, you will learn the difference between talking in forums and actually bringing a real product to market.
Then if it's truly better people will buy it, so more power to you ;-)
-
Breaking news - hardware for AmigaOS is expensive! :O
HW for classics is expensive, this is just silly ;)
-
Altivec isn't used in Amiga software at the moment
Amiga programmers can't use it? It is not a rocket science, really. Or maybe they are limited to porting Linux programs, which concentrate on x86 and nobody cares about AltiVec there?
-
Altivec isn't used in Amiga software at the moment (with the sole exeption of mplayer) so it's basically irrelevant.
Yes it is unfortunate indeed. AltiVec can be used everywhere. It gives most benefit when it's actually used by the OS components, like in MorphOS. All applications using the OS features benefit automatically.
-
How about a powerful LOW cost Amiga derivative. I'm with Steven on this. ARM boards cost under $200. Where's the NG OS for these?
A decently powerful(with all the drivers) low cost Amiga derivative can be bought from iMica(edit: AresOne is also very cheap).
But if you do not like x86, AROS ARM port is also underway.
-
Ah! And to those who believe they have a better idea, go do it, you will learn the difference between talking in forums and actually bringing a real product to market.
I did. See here: http://www.morphos-team.net/news.html
-
People complaining about high prices on the amiga-market is just pathetic. It's just a hobby market so there's not much to do about it. Buy whats available if you're intrested in Amiga, if you're not intrested in Amiga go buy some cheap windows box
-
I did. See here: http://www.morphos-team.net/news.html
Thanks Piru, I use that better idea everyday.
-
or a cheap mac
-
People complaining about high prices on the amiga-market is just pathetic. It's just a hobby market so there's not much to do about it. Buy whats available if you're intrested in Amiga, if you're not intrested in Amiga go buy some cheap windows box
No, it's not pathetic... it's spot on the mark. I would love to buy a OS4 machine - for hobby. But how can I justify a 1000 euros Sam460(without even taking performance into account)? Let's not even go into the X1000 price domain...
A hobby OS should come on a hobby priced hardware. Not professional priced hardware.
-
So indeed it makes sense for OS4 users to pay a lot more for inferior, much slower hardware. Congratulations!
What's up Piru, MorphOS registrations down this month?!?
-
or a cheap mac
Well OSX seems to be quite fine but Mac is quite overpriced IMHO
-
Well OSX seems to be quite fine but Mac is quite overpriced IMHO
Just buy a used G4 Mac - they are dirt cheap and you can run the most advanced Amigaish OSes beside OS X. Especially the Mac mini is still a geogeous device: small, neat, energy efficient, pretty fast with MorphOS.
-
No, it's not pathetic... it's spot on the mark. I would love to buy a OS4 machine - for hobby. But how can I justify a 1000 euros Sam460(without even taking performance into account)? Let's not even go into the X1000 price domain...
A hobby OS should come on a hobby priced hardware. Not professional priced hardware.
Yeah it's too bad that not all can enjoy OS4 :( but what i meant is that it's pathetic when people complain about it and want it to cost them no money at all but they have no problem spending the money on a new car etc.
-
Just buy a used G4 Mac - they are dirt cheap and you can run the most advanced Amigaish OSes beside OS X. Especially the Mac mini is still a geogeous device: small, neat, energy efficient, pretty fast with MorphOS.
Why would i use something that has nothing to do with my hobby and is MUCH more limited and expensive than the mainstream alternatives?
-
People complaining about high prices on the amiga-market is just pathetic. It's just a hobby market so there's not much to do about it. Buy whats available if you're intrested in Amiga, if you're not intrested in Amiga go buy some cheap windows box
Wow, what a elitist attitude. That's a 180 from Jack Tramel's, ""We need to build computers for the masses, not the classes."
-
@Piru
I was referring to the hardships of creating and bringing to market an Hardware product made for a small niche.
Anyway I don't think that these initiatives (such as this thread) will bring more people to MOS, just annoy other members.
-
Breaking news - hardware for AmigaOS is expensive! :O
But dirt cheap for AROS, go figure.
-
Hmm, now that I think about it this thread might have a better home at "Amiga Hardware Issues and discussion". Mods: Move if you wish.
Moved.
-
People complaining about high prices on the amiga-market is just pathetic. It's just a hobby market so there's not much to do about it. Buy whats available if you're intrested in Amiga, if you're not intrested in Amiga go buy some cheap windows box
The Pandora handheld, the beagleboard, Jens's ACA accelerators all are in the hobby market. While they have higher prices than mainstream computing, none of them are extreme. Unlike this.
-
Why would i use something that has nothing to do with my hobby and is MUCH more limited and expensive than the mainstream alternatives?
Dunno - what was you hobby again?
Was it using a computer in the spirit of Commodore Amiga or was it woshipping a name?
-
Dunno - what was you hobby again?
Was it using a computer in the spirit of Commodore Amiga or was it woshipping a name?
using my amigas and keeping the amiga "alive"
-
@Piru
I was referring to the hardships of creating and bringing to market an Hardware product made for a small niche.
I've said it before and I say it again: It makes no sense at all to try build niche HW like that. The potential market is too small and the product price will be astronomical. Since it is doubtful if the business is profitable it is also possible that the company producing such HW disappears, along with the support/replacement HW.
Going for the mainstream HW (such as Apple) makes much more sense. Prices are lower and there are numerous companies offering hardware repairs, support and parts. Just try to get a replacement parts for an AmigaONE and you see the point.
Small projects can work: Such as an expansion for C64, or some expansion HW for classic amiga. But 900 € project is way too expensive to work on a niche field.
-
@zylesea
Blue: "name followers!!", Red:"za real thing" ........again?
Come on guys let's just cut the usual Red VS Blue childish discussions.
Mos is a good Amiga experience for those that like the Amiga spirit on any HW that also happen to be cheap and performing (and PPC based, which is a plus IMHO), others prefer the old paradigm of custom HW+AmigaOS and are willing to pay more for it.
No need to start the Nth thread about "Aoh! Come to me! I am better! Cheaper!" (and other crying forms).
-
Of course smf is allowed to like only the officially branded products. I bet C=USA will have a happy customer there :)
Seriously speaking for any business purposes the "amiga" brand has already been diluted beyond repair. The only value it might have is the association of about 20+ years ago and that was gaming pretty much. C=USA (however irritating they may be) have understood it and are trying to milk the last drops of value out of the name. Assuming they don't fold before they get something out they might actually pull it off.
The irony of this doesn't escape me.
-
@Piru
I've said it before and I say it again: It makes no sense at all to try build niche HW like that. The potential market is too small and the product price will be astronomical. Since it is doubtful if the business is profitable it is also possible that the company producing such HW disappears, along with the support/replacement HW.
Going for the mainstream HW (such as Apple) makes much more sense. Prices are lower and there are numerous companies offering hardware repairs, support and parts. Just try to get a replacement parts for an AmigaONE and you see the point.
Small projects can work: Such as an expansion for C64, or some expansion HW for classic amiga. But 900 € project is way too expensive to work on a niche field.
Who knows maybe you are right.
But some people think it's cool as they still like the "we have our own HW" feeling, and there is people willing to take the risk and actually do it.
I respect what you said (it makes sense on many extents), please respect the above described group too.
Mos is a cool alternative that needs not such apple to orange comparisons (different paradigms for differently minded folks) in order to deserve attention.
I believe these threads actually hurt its image when started by a developer.
-
Of course smf is allowed to like only the officially branded products. I bet C=USA will have a happy customer there :)
lol Ofcourse ;)
-
@zylesea
Blue: "name followers!!", Red:"za real thing" ........again?
Come on guys let's just cut the usual Red VS Blue childish discussions.
Mos is a good Amiga experience for those that like the Amiga spirit on any HW that also happen to be cheap and performing (and PPC based, which is a plus IMHO), others prefer the old paradigm of custom HW+AmigaOS and are willing to pay more for it.
No need to start the Nth thread about "Aoh! Come to me! I am better! Cheaper!" (and other crying forms).
You forgot the blue butterfly arguments that one, our OS runs better and two, not only is our hardware cheaper its also faster.
-
You forgot the blue butterfly arguments that one, our OS runs better and two, not only is our hardware cheaper its also faster.
you forgot you don't have your own HW. Some Amigans just don't like it that way. Respect that.
As for "it runs better", I am glad there is fierce competition, it creates motivation :)
-
you forgot you don't have your own HW. Some Amigans just don't like it that way. Respect that.
As for "it runs better", I am glad there is fierce competition, it creates motivation :)
YOU forgot the Efika and the Pegasos. While out of productiom, they are both MorphOS specific. Further, I don't care as my hardware is inexpensive and easily repaired (and faster).
-
@Piru
Mos is a cool alternative that needs not such apple to orange comparisons (different paradigms for differently minded folks) in order to deserve attention.)
I believe these threads actually hurt its image when started by a developer.
I beg to differ.
IMHO even sensitive topics should be discussed, as long as the discussion is kept civil. Of course there is no way of pleasing everyone but I believe comparisons such as this make sense. This is what forums are for after all, discussion.
Also, I believe current and potential MorphOS users are mostly practical bunch of people. They're not that much involved in politics of things or imago issues. They've already accepted the fact that different solutions can co-exist and that name is not the only thing that matters. They see that we offer a good product with a reasonable price. IMHO censoring ones opinions to avoid hurting your "image" is a rather bleak view of things. I won't do that.
-
No longer in production HW and the knowledge that no HW will ever be made again count as having no future, HW wise.
Some care about it, some, like you, does not.
I respect your point of view, please respect those with opposite feelings.
These two way of thinking can happily co-exist. :knuddel:
-
you forgot you don't have your own HW. Some Amigans just don't like it that way. Respect that.
I respect their opinion, but I don't understand their reasoning behind it. That HW has nothing to do with original Amiga anymore.
It's just something you run your OS and software on. As long as the HW is affordable, reliable and well built quality product what difference does it make who produced it, or which label does it have?
-
@Piru
I can see you differ, but that has nothing to do with censorship.
I agree, those that chose MOS are practical although not too much otherwise they would stay away from ANY Amiga flavor :lol:
You see Windows7 is cost effective, and receives support for the most recent technology earlier than competition (see support for PCI-E HD, 256Bit vector units, both from Autodesk, or HW tessellation HW just to name a few) I wouldn't walk the "practical" road too much if I was selling an Amiga like OS.
"love" for it, is more like it... ;)
-
I respect their opinion, but I don't understand their reasoning behind it. That HW has nothing to do with original Amiga anymore.
It's just something you run your OS and software on. As long as the HW is affordable, reliable and well built quality product what difference does it make who produced it, or which label does it have?
Reasoning's might change from people to people, yours above is a good one for many.
Other like the feeling of being as different as it gets, so that need is further satisfied if you develop HW and have your OS run on it.
Degustibus
-
No longer in production HW and the knowledge that no HW will ever be made again count as having no future, HW wise.
Now you're just making things up.
Nowhere have I said that we will limit ourself to Mac HW forever. It is currently and in the near future the best solution, however.
Some care about it, some, like you, does not.
There's no need to get personal. What I care or don't care is irrelevant, nor can you read my mind. If you really respect my views you don't need to do this.
-
I likee Windows 7 its a good OS. Get over it microsoft haters.
And I may be wrong but Im pretty sure the sam boards were not created specfically for AOS4. So AOS4 has had no new hardware since AmigaOne and its been ported to a MorphOS board :)
-
Other like the feeling of being as different as it gets, so that need is further satisfied if you develop HW and have your OS run on it.
Building expensive, slow and rare HW just to be exotic and different from everyone else doesn't sound a good strategy to me. But I suppose that can be seen as a value by some.
-
Building expensive, slow and rare HW just to be exotic and different from everyone else doesn't sound a good strategy to me. But I suppose that can be seen as a value by some.
Isn't it just as insane as making crappy os'es that's lightyears behind the rest? but i suppose that can be seen as a value by some.
-
@Piru
There was no ill intention in that "like you" comment of mine, it was just for example sake, like "I care" "you don't" "he might", lazily worded (I should have included the other examples too to be more clear), I apologize for that.
-
Isn't it just as insane as making crappy os'es that's lightyears behind the rest? but i suppose that can be seen as a value by some.
Are you saying the MorphOS is lightyears behind other OS and crappy ?
Some examples please
-
Are you saying the MorphOS is lightyears behind other OS and crappy ?
Some examples please
I didn't mention Morphos at all,Why should i? we all know how advanced it is.
-
@JJ
He probably meant that all Amiga like OS are not on par with the likes of Windows7 (ie:SMP, 64BIT memory in the Gigabytes, DX11 with tesselation support and an endless list of other features) but we still care.
Some search for a particular thing some for another (such as original HW+SW combo) and they see more value in a flavor or another.
Maybe we should respect each other a little more.
Yes Mos is more mature, yes AOS is evolving and offers the custom HW/OS thing some like very much.
Mos might get new HW in the future, as Piru said it's not out of the question, AOS might mature a lot with SMP, new 3D subsystem and so on.
Long live Amiga in all of its flavors :)
-
Long live Amiga in all of its flavors :)
Indeed :)
And personally I like the fact that SAM systems are available. And I like that fact that AOS is AOS and not a copy/rip of some other OS.
-
Indeed :)
And personally I like the fact that SAM systems are available. And I like that fact that AOS is AOS and not a copy/rip of some other OS.
Must resist temptation.... Will be labeled a troll if I reply...:afro:
-
I think all the different flavor is good. MorphOS is good. Aros is good, OS4 is good. Heck 3.1 is good. The future was bleak after the collapse. Having a lot of different people in a lot of different camps is good! All of you are right and valid. Arguing with a MorphOS developer (ie Piru) that his choice is dumb is...well...dumb!
I second the "Long Live Amiga in all its forms!"
Oh, and anything over 3.1 isn't Amiga :roflmao:
-
Isn't it just as insane as making crappy os'es that's lightyears behind the rest?
Yes.
Luckily the OS I'm making isn't crappy.
-
And I may be wrong but Im pretty sure the sam boards were not created specfically for AOS4.
That's a good question. Quite often the argument gets thrown in that Acube delivers to some embedded market. Yet I never saw evidence that Acube is *really* delivering (say at leat 25% of their produced boards) to industrial customers.
-
Isn't it just as insane as making crappy os'es that's lightyears behind the rest? but i suppose that can be seen as a value by some.
Define crappy.
Whom do you actually have in mind who's making a crappy OS?
-
its a shame the ppc guys are not making boards like the pandaboard does arm from TI.
imagine for $180, dual core 1ghz, 1gb ram, opengl es 2.0, blue tooth, wireless, onboard ethernet, sd card slot, dvi/hdmi out in tiny formfactor size..
ah well dreams :)
-
Apart from blue tooth and the specs being too low you've just described AROS on x86 :)
-
Arm seems to be going from strength strength. This is what rumoured to be in new Sony PSP2 in 4 core version.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_Cortex-A9_MPCore
I would see ARM as maybe being the future for both camps
-
Its funny moaning about the high prices, their be a lot of people out side of the Amiga community that would say paying 111Euro for an out dated limited AmigaOS inspire OS such as MorphOS for outdated mac hardware is madness. Its all a matter of perspective and what you want/enjoy. Hell Linux users must think everyones mad paying for anything!
Out of the next gen systems I have used, I've enjoyed AmigaOS4 the most, so I plan to support it, either getting a Sam460 or if I can afford it an AmigaONE X1000, no one is forcing me to buy these products it be nice if they would be available cheaper but they are not (weather they can be or not is another debate), they simple not, I have accepted that and still going to invest in something I hopefully enjoy, I know a lot of my friends and family think I'm mad, but its simple what I enjoy.
PS: No one mentioned the second hand market, you can find a few AmigaONE and Sam system their now for around £600 and the price is only likely to come down more as we get more and better hardware so I do think /would like to think some users go that root to just try out the OS.
-
their be a lot of people out side of the Amiga community that would say paying 111Euro for an out dated limited AmigaOS inspire OS such as MorphOS for outdated mac hardware is madness.
Most certainly. I have friends (/me waves at #amigafin ppl) who think it's pure lunacy. They do however considered it even more ridiculous to spend almost a 1000 € on a custom built HW that is even slower than most of those old Macs.
Its all a matter of perspective and what you want/enjoy.
Exactly so. It still must suck to be OS4 fan though, the performance/price ratio leaves much to be desired.
PS: No one mentioned the second hand market, you can find a few AmigaONE and Sam system their now for around £600 and the price is only likely to come down more as we get more and better hardware so I do think /would like to think some users go that root to just try out the OS.
You bring up a good point. Here's another reason why supporting "old" Macs is a good thing: You can download MorphOS ISO image for free and try it on supported system. You're likely to find PowerPC Macs everywhere, maybe a family member or a friend has one. Just pop in the CD-R and boot the system and you're running MorphOS live CD.
OS4 users are not that lucky. There's no easy way to test OS4 before you buy.
-
Yes we have mentioned second hand market
thats how i got my mac mini 1.5ghz, 64mb gpu for £150
-
Its funny moaning about the high prices, their be a lot of people out side of the Amiga community that would say paying 111Euro for an out dated limited AmigaOS inspire OS such as MorphOS for outdated mac hardware is madness. Its all a matter of perspective and what you want/enjoy. Hell Linux users must think everyones mad paying for anything!
Paying money isn't an issue generally and everybody has/his her own standards what is acceptable. And for me I think a niche solution is aceptable for 3 -5 times the price of the standard solution.
Hence MorphOS (111.11 EUR vs. 74 EUR for Win7 OEM): check!
Pegasos 1 back in 2002 (480 EUR for g3/600 vs. ~ 180 EUR for AMD Duron/800 + MSI µATX board + Cooler): check!
Efika 5200B (99 EUR vs. something you get for 33 EUR): check!
Sam460 (895 EUR vs. Intel Atomboard for 59 EUR): fail!
X1000 (~2000 EUR vs. Amd Athlon Ii X2 245 - 2 X 2.9ghz | 2gb for 169 EUR): fail!
So it s not the actual ammount of money, but rather about comparability. And I think the factor 3-5 times is rather friendly enough to cater for fond feelings, hobby, niche, #?. But of course these are only my standards.
For 300 I'd consider buying a Sam460, for 850 I'd consider an X1000 (I like the PA6T) - these are the factor 5 prices of the comparable standard products.
-
The future was bleak after the collapse. Having a lot of different people in a lot of different camps is good!:
Can't say I agree with you there. We'd have more consistent and cheaper hardware, and probably more software, if we we had not been split into seperate camps.
-
How many years have HyperionOS4.x users been waiting for USB2.0 support? I'm guessing forever, but I know that now someone will come and say "USB2.0 is already in betatesting." or "It will be released soon." Well they have been saying that since the beta of AOS4.0 was released.
-
Here's another reason why supporting "old" Macs is a good thing: You can download MorphOS ISO image for free and try it on supported system. You're likely to find PowerPC Macs everywhere, maybe a family member or a friend has one. Just pop in the CD-R and boot the system and you're running MorphOS live CD.
OS4 users are not that lucky. There's no easy way to test OS4 before you buy.
I disagree, there are enough user group meeting or Amiga shows you can go and visit to test the systems, ask the question and get advice etc, all for free (minus the travel time/cost) that how I got to the decision that OS4 was more for me, I do admit cheap and easily available hardware is always going to be better (that why I also like Aros, plus I dont have to buy anything!). But I think going that root would be a mistake at least at the moment, they might as give it try and see if there is a market big enough and willing enough to invest more money for custom made hardware, I think if its not and the AmigaONE project fails then they should go the Mac root as quick as possible.
-
Define crappy.
Whom do you actually have in mind who's making a crappy OS?
i define all OS'es that can't follow the 2011 standards as crap. You know it and i know it that we're both using crap that would not had a chance even 10 years ago.
-
MorphOS (111.11 EUR vs. 74 EUR for Win7 OEM): check!
Or you could say
MorphOS (111.11 EUR vs. Free for Ubuntu Linux) thats a 111 times markup value. :eek:
But like you and I have said we all have our own thoughts on how much we should spend on what is after all a hobby.
-
I disagree, there are enough user group meeting or Amiga shows you can go and visit to test the systems, ask the question and get advice etc, all for free (minus the travel time/cost) that how I got to the decision that OS4 was more for me, I do admit cheap and easily available hardware is always going to be better (that why I also like Aros, plus I dont have to buy anything!). But I think going that root would be a mistake at least at the moment, they might as give it try and see if there is a market big enough and willing enough to invest more money for custom made hardware, I think if its not and the AmigaONE project fails then they should go the Mac root as quick as possible.
It failed eight years ago.
-
It failed eight years ago.
Actually Eyetech where doing ok with sales of the Amigaone it was more their hardware problems and suppliers that was their undoing. Plus Acube must of sold enough Sam board to warrant developing 440 flex and 460 systems.
Plus Hyperion and A-eon I sure must know the Os4 users number must think their is enough demand for a new high end system.
Plus if they get the AmigaONE X1000 out and sell the planned first batch of 250 machine they are building (im sure I read that some where) at let say £2,000 that's £500,000.00 a half a million pound turn over, I would not consider that a fail. I think that number of units is just about doable judging by the amount of interest in it. what can I say other than....i believe.
-
i define all OS'es that can't follow the 2011 standards as crap. You know it and i know it that we're both using crap that would not had a chance even 10 years ago.
That is definitely not my definition of crap. My definiton for crap is more like bad by design and/or realization for the intended/advertized purpose.
I don't see the amigaish OSes see fullilling this standard (at least not the majority).
What you define as crap, I'd define as non-standard. And that is a big difference.
For example:
Crap was (spare) bicyle I once had: It was slow, it was heavy, the tyres had no duty and the lock failed miserably as did the gear shift. Though I got it for free and was intended as 3rd spare bicycle to go to partys with, it not even fullfilled my lowest expectaions I had on it. When it was stolen I really felt sorry *for the thief*. The high roll-resistance, failing gear shift, soft tyres were not advertised. It wasn't a working solution, not for the lowest expectation - it was crap. If it was sold as decoration only, then I probably wouldn'tconsidered it as crap.
And MorphOS (that is the only Amigaish one I can *seriously* judge about): It does what I expect from it, it does waht was advertizes. Probably not a solution for everybody, but no crap.
-
But like you and I have said we all have our own thoughts on how much we should spend on what is after all a hobby.
This is of course true. But I think debates like this one are good to understand our motives.
-
I disagree, there are enough user group meeting or Amiga shows you can go and visit to test the systems, ask the question and get advice etc, all for free
Please tell me what Amiga show or user group I may attend to see a modern OS4 box less than 1,800 miles from my house? I am in Fort Lauderdale, FL (USA).
-Edit-
BTW, please don't say AmiWest as it would be 3,100 miles away (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=33317&daddr=sacramento,+ca&hl=en&geocode=FVZgjgEdzto3-ykneLWcDAfZiDFh41a8RWaeVg%3BFUS1TAIdgCTC-Cn5l4OycsaagDHbfxl0qmofkg&mra=ls&sll=32.3525,-100.825425&sspn=29.858556,55.458984&ie=UTF8&z=4).
-
Actually Eyetech where doing ok with sales of the Amigaone it was more their hardware problems and suppliers that was their undoing.
They were? Didnt Alan Redhouse say they were making loss with their AmigaOne? Even when sold at some $1000 price. I have never seen proof Eyetech was doing ok.
Plus Acube must of sold enough Sam board to warrant developing 440 flex and 460 systems.
Did OS4 sales warrant new systems or was it sales to Linux market?
Plus Hyperion and A-eon I sure must know the Os4 users number must think their is enough demand for a new high end system.
Apart from existing OS4 users there isnt demand... In Finland there apparently isnt any market for this. In other countries it seems it is existing OS4 users, same for X1K beta testers I have met or seen.
Plus if they get the AmigaONE X1000 out and sell the planned first batch of 250 machine they are building (im sure I read that some where) at let say £2,000 that's £500,000.00 a half a million pound turn over, I would not consider that a fail. I think that number of units is just about doable judging by the amount of interest in it. what can I say other than....i believe.
If they could even get beta tester boards out. It is terribly late already and I dont expect machines arrive until end of 2011.
-
i define all OS'es that can't follow the 2011 standards as crap. You know it and i know it that we're both using crap that would not had a chance even 10 years ago.
Saying Amiga is crap is weird argument to spend thousands of dollars.
-
Plus if they get the AmigaONE X1000 out and sell the planned first batch of 250 machine they are building (im sure I read that some where) at let say £2,000 that's £500,000.00 a half a million pound turn over, I would not consider that a fail. I think that number of units is just about doable judging by the amount of interest in it. what can I say other than....i believe.
By June 2010 they were already £167,785.00 down. With no money coming in for another 6 months hasn't improved the situation. I very much doubt 250 units at price £2,000 will cover it.
As Trevor put it: Personally I would be happy if we just recovered our original investment but, in reality we will also need to generate some profit in order to re-invest in new hardware development and possibly attract additional funding if we are to see the AmigaOne product line continue to flourish in the future. (source (http://obligement.free.fr/articles_traduction/itwdickinson_en.php))
Currently it doesn't look very good I'm afraid. More delays means more costs, and the ROI keeps dropping. If it goes low (or even to loss) you can pretty much say goodbye to any future AmigaOne. Since the market for the products is limited to hundreds at best it may well be that the project could fail completely. You could fight this by upping the end product price but I believe there is a limit somewhere. Certainly going over say £2,500.00 would be too much already.
We will know the result by the end of 2011 I believe.
-
Please tell me what Amiga show or user group I may attend to see a modern OS4 box less than 1,800 miles from my house? I am in Fort Lauderdale, FL (USA).
-Edit-
BTW, please don't say AmiWest as it would be 3,100 miles away (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=33317&daddr=sacramento,+ca&hl=en&geocode=FVZgjgEdzto3-ykneLWcDAfZiDFh41a8RWaeVg%3BFUS1TAIdgCTC-Cn5l4OycsaagDHbfxl0qmofkg&mra=ls&sll=32.3525,-100.825425&sspn=29.858556,55.458984&ie=UTF8&z=4).
Acording to http://map.minimig.net/?filter=sam
There are two user Xilinder, Jim McKenzie in florida, why not try and track them down and just ask if you can try, I never said this is the perfect way of doing it. Plus you can also buy it and sell it on if its not for you, unlike most hardware, AMiga hardware does keep its value quite well, you most likely won't lose more than £100 to see if you like it. Which is most likely less that it would cost you get your hand on a second hand mac to try MorphOS out on.
update
Acually yerh forgot about how cheap emacs and ppc mac do go for now. But still you could get a second hand AmigaOne or Sam to try out and sell it on with out losing anything or even if you get lucky make a profit! I just saying worst case scenario I would of thought would be maybe a £100 lost.
-
Which is most likely less that it would cost you get your hand on a second hand mac to try MorphOS out on.
Don't tell that to redrumloa, he's already proven you wrong!
-
I don't think you can get a pegasos any longer.
-
Exactly so. It still must suck to be OS4 fan though, the performance/price ratio leaves much to be desired.
.
If I didn't already own an AmigaOne I would be out in the cold. The hardware choices just suck. Whats even worse is the fact that I'm stuck with a MicroA1 with little to no options for an upgrade. At the same time OS 4.1's video memory usage has sky rocketed. As a Micro user I'm being left behind.
I recently got a PowerMac 1.4 Ghz with MorphOS and I'm incredibly happy. Best Amiga like experience yet. It actually got me interested in the hobby again.
-
Don't tell that to redrumloa, he's already proven you wrong!
Acually yerh forgot about how cheap emacs and ppc mac do go for now. But still you could get a second hand AmigaOne or Sam to try out and sell it on with out losing anything or even if you get lucky make a profit!Just saying worst case scenario I would of thought would be maybe a £100 lost.
-
Acording to http://map.minimig.net/?filter=sam
There are two user Xilinder, Jim McKenzie in florida, why not try and track them down and just ask if you can try, I never said this is the perfect way of doing it. Plus you can also buy it and sell it on if its not for you, unlike most hardware, AMiga hardware does keep its value quite well, you most likely won't lose more than £100 to see if you like it. Which is most likely less that it would cost you get your hand on a second hand mac to try MorphOS out on.
2 Individual users in central Florida? It would be too weird to ask someone I don't know to come into their house to try their OS4 box. Okeechobee, FL would still be a 220 mile round trip. With gas prices where they are, a $30 dollar eMac is still cheaper even if I imposed on these indiviudal owners and they agreed. $30 is about what I paid for my 1.25Ghz eMac, no shipping costs. They are plentiful down here.
-
How about a nice deal on a G3 AmigaOne SE in a Commodore Gaming midtower case, red? ;)
-
By June 2010 they were already £167,785.00 down. With no money coming in for another 6 months hasn't improved the situation. I very much doubt 250 units at price £2,000 will cover it.
Ok well lets say total development cost is £200,000. Then they need to make £800 profit on each machine sold if they only sell 250. So if the cost of making the machine doesn't go over £1,200 they can do it, ok I know that's a bit of a stretch, as the beta boards cost that much, but who to say they are not making a bit of profit on them? Adding the extas like the case, drives etc and building it would cost no more than £300 I would off thought, so lets say £1,500 is the total cost of each X1000 so they make £500 on each system at £2,000 so they would need to sell 400 machines to break even. (well their are around 2,000+ OS4 users? + Xmos users + linux PPC fans) so maybe they could still sell that many at that price.
I suppose then adding tax and shipping the £2,000 price point is looking very unlikely but I'm sure they have someone better than me working out the money side, I just hope they can get it to around that price as I dont think it will be as successful as they hope if it much more than that, I think it would be a shame for not just AmigaOS4 but for all users.
-
How about a nice deal on a G3 AmigaOne SE in a Commodore Gaming midtower case, red? ;)
Umm, no:roflmao:
-
so lets say £1,500 is the total cost of each X1000 so they make £500 on each system at £2,000 so they would need to sell 400 machines to break even. (well their are around 2,000+ OS4 users? + Xmos users + linux PPC fans) so maybe they could still sell that many at that price.
Dont count on Linux. Genesi tried that only to find out Linux PPC users do not exist. Linux PPC is (was) mostly ran as an alternative OS on Macs or Amigas (A1, Peg, APUS).
-
I don't think you can get a pegasos any longer.
Used Pegasos are fairly common and not that expensive. While the fastest Powermacs outperform them under MporphOS, Pegs can run OS4. In fact, I'd be willing to bet a 1 Ghz Pegasos is probably the highest performing OS4 platform currently available.
It would be a close call between the Pegasos and the SAM460EX and you can buy a Peg cheaper.
-
How about a nice deal on a G3 AmigaOne SE in a Commodore Gaming midtower case, red? ;)
How nice?
PM me.
-
They were? Didnt Alan Redhouse say they were making loss with their AmigaOne? Even when sold at some $1000 price. I have never seen proof Eyetech was doing ok.
"2) How many AmigaOne boards have been sold so far and what is your opinion on the demand for the current boards and upcoming Micro1A boards?
Alan: From the publicly available figures it seems that we have delivered more AmigaOne boards than any other 'open' (ie not IBM or Apple) PPC-based standard PC form factor board supplier. And in terms of real sales for real money (which in my view is the ultimate measure of success anyone can give boards away) we really seem to have no significant competition to date"
FROM= http://amigaworld.net/modules/features/index.php?op=r&cat_id=3&rev_id=41&sort_by (http://amigaworld.net/modules/features/index.php?op=r&cat_id=3&rev_id=41&sort_by)
-
"2) How many AmigaOne boards have been sold so far and what is your opinion on the demand for the current boards and upcoming Micro1A boards?
Alan: From the publicly available figures it seems that we have delivered more AmigaOne boards than any other 'open' (ie not IBM or Apple) PPC-based standard PC form factor board supplier. And in terms of real sales for real money (which in my view is the ultimate measure of success"
http://amigaworld.net/modules/features/index.php?op=r&cat_id=3&rev_id=41&sort_by
Let me pick some highlights from that:
- publicly available figures
- seems
If it was such a great success why didn't Eyetech handle warranties (which were supposedly covered by the profit margin, and was given as reason for the high price!) and why did Eyetech fail? Trying to blame it on MAI doesn't explain it. They were told numerous times that the MAI chipsets were defect.
-
So indeed it makes sense for OS4 users to pay a lot more for inferior, much slower hardware. Congratulations!
MorphOS is a nice operating system, but is Amiga Os 4.x is made from original sources of Amiga Os 3.1.
You MOSTeam were not honored, to join your source code with the holy sources of Amiga OS 3.1.
I'm sorry, but when I was young, I used the Amiga OS, not MorphOS.
You have done a good job, but it is not what it should be.
-
If it was such a great success why didn't Eyetech handle warranties (which were supposedly covered by the profit margin, and was given as reason for the high price!) and why did Eyetech fail? Trying to blame it on MAI doesn't explain it. They were told numerous times that the MAI chipsets were defect.
If it was such a fail, why did they continue to develop a new model, like I said it was mostly likely the level of claims on hardware problems/issue that got made they most likly thought to just pull the plug before they loss all their profits, sad but most likely true.
-
Let me pick some highlights from that:
- publicly available figures
- seems
If it was such a great success why didn't Eyetech handle warranties (which were supposedly covered by the profit margin, and was given as reason for the high price!) and why did Eyetech fail? Trying to blame it on MAI doesn't explain it. They were told numerous times that the MAI chipsets were defect.
What does any of this have to do with the SAM460EX? And while the SAM460EX is overpriced, in what fashion is it slow? I would be willing to bet its memory bandwidth is significantly higher than a Pegasos or a Powermac.
At 1.15 Ghz, this is the fastest board Acube has produced.
-
Sam460EX is a way to give new HW (instead of clunky old one) to the AmigaOS, Altivec isn't used in Amiga software at the moment (with the sole exeption of mplayer) so it's basically irrelevant.
Actually, Altivec isn't irrelevant. It is used (albeit not as extensively as I'd like) in MiniGL, the avcodec library, and IIRC, some other parts of the OS too. Even if it weren't used at present, it's important enough that Freescale have finally decided to add it to their QorIQ range of processors. About time! It would be nice if Applied Micro could follow suit; their new dual-core PowerPC processor would be a lot more interesting if it included altivec.
The Sam 460ex is meant to be a low-end machine. It may not have altivec, but it's still a nice machine. It's a good step up from the Sam 440 series, and I prefer it over my A1-XE G4. Why? Mainly because of the PCI-Express bus and faster RAM.
Having said that, I'm still getting an A1-X1000.
Hans
-
What does any of this have to do with the SAM460EX? And while the SAM460EX is overpriced, in what fashion is it slow? I would be willing to bet its memory bandwidth is significantly higher than a Pegasos or a Powermac.
At 1.15 Ghz, this is the fastest board Acube has produced.
it does; Andreas benchmarked it; other than video bus, mac min beat it out.
here (http://www.morphzone.org/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=7001&sortname=&sortorder=&sortdays=&viewmode=flat&order=0&start=483)
Andreas_Wolf wrote:
Comparison Sam460ex at 1.167 GHz (OS4) vs. Mac mini G4 at 1.5 GHz (MorphOS):
Sam460ex results:
---> VIDEO BUS <---
READ: 72 MB/Sec
WRITE: 261 MB/Sec
Mac mini G4 results (my machine):
---> VIDEO BUS <---
READ: 32 MB/Sec
WRITE: 180 MB/Sec
-
MorphOS is a nice operating system, but is Amiga Os 4.x is made from original sources of Amiga Os 3.1.
What are teh old sources worth when the resulting OS performs less and doesn't offer as many features and has a worse backward compability?
I'm sorry, but when I was young, I used the Amiga OS, not MorphOS.
The older I become the more experience I collect and gain more ability to critically review long gone things...
Fond feelings are nice but I reality is something different. And to tell you what:*if you critically view your fond feelings (well, don't mix fond feelings with experience and hsitory), you can very much enjoy the present as it is. At leat *I* do.
-
"2) How many AmigaOne boards have been sold so far and what is your opinion on the demand for the current boards and upcoming Micro1A boards?
Alan: From the publicly available figures it seems that we have delivered more AmigaOne boards than any other 'open' (ie not IBM or Apple) PPC-based standard PC form factor board supplier. And in terms of real sales for real money (which in my view is the ultimate measure of success anyone can give boards away) we really seem to have no significant competition to date"
FROM= http://amigaworld.net/modules/features/index.php?op=r&cat_id=3&rev_id=41&sort_by (http://amigaworld.net/modules/features/index.php?op=r&cat_id=3&rev_id=41&sort_by)
Alan Redhouse: "on schedule and rocking"
Any more words needed regarding his business credibility?
-
What does any of this have to do with the SAM460EX?
It's a response to a sub-thread in this topic, mainly regarding generic profitability of custom PowerPC HW. It's not unusual to get borderline OT on a.org ;)
And while the SAM460EX is overpriced, in what fashion is it slow?
It is slow for the price. It is roughly performing like a pegasos II G4 in CPU intensive tasks, assuming you ignore altivec.
I would be willing to bet its memory bandwidth is significantly higher than a Pegasos or a Powermac.
The memory performance is better, yes.
At 1.15 Ghz, this is the fastest board Acube has produced.
No question about that. It's just that faster powerpc HW was produced 7 years ago. You can get faster systems for fraction (literally!) of the price.
-
Nice one. Already 9 pages of the usual bash-fest. As I suppose the thread was started exactly for this purpose, I would say it succeeded. :-(
-
Well at $1025 US dollars with AOS4 bit w/o shipping it is a bit rich for my tastes. The on board video is nice for basic tasks that don't require 3D.
My next purchases are still going to be a Powerbook and a G5 Powermac.
I can probably outfit both of those for the price of the SAM469EX board.
Still, I object to the SAM460EX as being called slow, its just way overpriced.
-
"2) How many AmigaOne boards have been sold so far and what is your opinion on the demand for the current boards and upcoming Micro1A boards?
Alan: From the publicly available figures it seems that we have delivered more AmigaOne boards than any other 'open' (ie not IBM or Apple) PPC-based standard PC form factor board supplier. And in terms of real sales for real money (which in my view is the ultimate measure of success anyone can give boards away) we really seem to have no significant competition to date"
FROM= http://amigaworld.net/modules/features/index.php?op=r&cat_id=3&rev_id=41&sort_by (http://amigaworld.net/modules/features/index.php?op=r&cat_id=3&rev_id=41&sort_by)
http://www.amigaworld.net/modules/news/article.php?storyid=2339
"In fact as it stands today it would have been far cheaper for us to have given all current board owners $500 each not to buy a board and walked away from the whole Amiga scene in early 2001."
"Secondly the 'Amiga Enthusiast' market does not generate sufficient profit for us to be able to indulge ourselves (in reality myself - all our former 'Amiga' staff and most of me are off doing proper revenue-earning things unconnected with the Amiga Enthusiast market) in non-essential time consuming activities. Even these 20 answers are being typed on my laptop on holiday!"
If it was such a fail, why did they continue to develop a new model, like I said it was mostly likely the level of claims on hardware problems/issue that got made they most likly thought to just pull the plug before they loss all their profits, sad but most likely true.
They didnt. Eyetech went out of the business when they could not fund development of new board on their own. Eyetech only succeeded by selling rebranded Teron boards to Amiga market. Boards which failed miserably on so called "Linux market".
-
If it was such a fail, why did they continue to develop a new model
If you're talking about Eyetech, all they were doing was taking whatever model of Teron MAI happened to ship over and labeling it an "AmigaOne". Who knows why MAI went through so many versions of their evaluation boards - if they hadn't gone out of business you could ask them.
Why did you even bring up Eyetech in this thread anyway?
-
In number crunching SAM 460 is barely as fast as the Pegasos2 G4@1GHz if you don't account for the altivec. If altivec is taken into account then G4@1GHz runs circles around the system. Granted, Sam460 has a faster memory interface, but the number crunching figures are quite disappointing.
Not doubting you, but do you care to toss out some numbers on this? I'd just like to know what size gap we're talking about here in performance.
-
A question for u OS4 die hards, when is too much too much?
1000 dollar motherboard 1 GHz motherboard, 2000 dollar 2 GHz motherboard, would you pay 3000 dollars for a 3 GHz mobo?
-
I have an A600 that was given to me with this accelerator: http://www.amiga-hardware.com/showhardware.cgi?HARDID=90 and it feels faster than any peecee I've ever used. It's all about the feel. Amiga Rules, Amiga Rocks, Long Live Amiga! If you don't like it, so what, I don't care.
-
Not doubting you, but do you care to toss out some numbers on this? I'd just like to know what size gap we're talking about here in performance.
The only CPU benchmark for SAM460 that I've seen has been the distributed.net client results from a 1GHz SAM460 (http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=32858&forum=33#591840). distributed.net is only bound by the CPU, and there are special optimized cores for AltiVec. This makes it possible to compare the CPUs performing highly CPU bound task with specifically optimized code. This test will not account for the memory bus performance differences, and for that more complex benchmarks would need to be run.
There are two types of distributed.net tasks, OGR and RC5-72.
OGR
- Sam 460 1.0GHz: 10,124,948 nodes/sec
- Pegasos 2 G4 1.0GHz: 20,844,783 nodes/sec
- Mac Mini G4 1.5GHz: 31,267,175 nodes/sec
RC5-72
- Sam 460 1.0GHz: 3,286,052 keys/sec
- Pegasos2 G4 1.0GHz: 10,678,428 keys/sec
- Mac Mini G4 1.5GHz: 15,701,333 keys/sec
The final Sam 460 is said to be running "upto 1.15 Ghz", but multiplying the results by 1.15 doesn't give significantly different results. In fairness the results are not as crushing when executing generic PowerPC code, however.
-
Why did you even bring up Eyetech in this thread anyway?
I sorry I did bring up Eyetech now, I was only replying to nicholas statement that the AmigaOne project failed 8 years ago, my reply was “Actually Eyetech where doing ok with sales of the Amigaone it was more their hardware problems and suppliers that was their undoing.”
I still stand by that statement, if the boards had no issues then more users like myself might of got them, but I was strongly (as where many others) put off by the fact that both the hardware and software was buggy. Plus suppliers issues is also true and the fact that Amiga Inc looked like they where going to screw them over all made the amigaone project fail 8 years ago. This all I was trying to get across. Now lets get the thread back on topic.
-
In powerpc amiga terms, I am still using a 603e, therefore by the "law of trying to compensate for other inadequacies", I clearly have the biggest manhood.
-
Nice one. Already 9 pages of the usual bash-fest. As I suppose the thread was started exactly for this purpose, I would say it succeeded. :-(
hey at least he & the usual MOS suspects stopped hi-jacking other OS4 threads and started this one..besides we all know this is Piru's main objective here anyway
-
In powerpc amiga terms, I am still using a 603e, therefore by the "law of trying to compensate for other inadequacies", I clearly have the biggest manhood.
I'm sure a MAc user will step in with a 60Mhz 601. :roflmao:
-
I'm sure a MAc user will step in with a 60Mhz 601. :roflmao:
Yeah, but being as it only runs MacOS classic, you have to factor in an order of magnitude reduction in size anyway. More than mitigates the bragging rights from having a 601 ;)
-
A question for u OS4 die hards, when is too much too much?
1000 dollar motherboard 1 GHz motherboard, 2000 dollar 2 GHz motherboard, would you pay 3000 dollars for a 3 GHz mobo?
That starts to make sense, because then you actually have a high end system.
I think that the IBM PowerPC units start around $10,000 and that is just too much (for me at least).
-
MorphOS is a nice operating system, but is Amiga Os 4.x is made from original sources of Amiga Os 3.1.
If you only knew...
-
Just a bare motherboard with an OS cdrom that doesnt even support USB 2.0 and all at the reasonable price of north of $1000.
Are these guys fraking nuts??? :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
-
I have an A600 that was given to me with this accelerator: http://www.amiga-hardware.com/showhardware.cgi?HARDID=90 and it feels faster than any peecee I've ever used. It's all about the feel. Amiga Rules, Amiga Rocks, Long Live Amiga! If you don't like it, so what, I don't care.
Because youre talking about a real amiga not a wannabe amiga like these sam boards, 900eur board underpowered for this price and waiting for the next ultraexpensive x1000 joke... and some people like cheerleaders for it =(
-
Because youre talking about a real amiga not a wannabe amiga like these sam boards, 900eur board underpowered for this price and waiting for the next ultraexpensive x1000 joke... and some people like cheerleaders for it =(
hmm many people are paying almost as much for your Blizzard 1260 on ebay but then that's a deal according to you because it's for a 'real' Amiga right:rolleyes:
-
this isnt a good example, you cant use second hand market like a excuse, second hand market have crazy prices sometimes, if crazy people pay (900eur???) for a blizzard 1260 its still sad... and please dont write "real".
-
A question for u OS4 die hards, when is too much too much?
1000 dollar motherboard 1 GHz motherboard, 2000 dollar 2 GHz motherboard, would you pay 3000 dollars for a 3 GHz mobo?
Just imagine if some day another amiga brand squezeer make a terahertz "amiga" heh
-
it's all in the eye of the beholder my friend;) I'm very happy you agree that crazy money for a Blizzard1260 is absurd so do you want to sell me your Blizzard 1260 for $100?? please pm me now:)
-
The equipment that both MOS and OS4 runs on are pretty outdated by now.
Is the bickering really worth it anymore? :(
My crappy 300 dollar off the shelf PC has more horse power than any hardware either OS will ever run on, and I didn't have to shell out money for a proprietary OS on top of it.
Throw AROS on there (free to use, free to share), and while it won't exploit all the hardware at the moment, at least it has a future.
Bonus points that if I wanted to run AROS, I can actually go into a store and buy a cheapie PC to run it on.
-
The equipment that both MOS and OS4 runs on are pretty outdated by now.
Is the bickering really worth it anymore? :(
My crappy 300 dollar off the shelf PC has more horse power than any hardware either OS will ever run on, and I didn't have to shell out money for a proprietary OS on top of it.
Throw AROS on there (free to use, free to share), and while it won't exploit all the hardware at the moment, at least it has a future.
Bonus points that if I wanted to run AROS, I can actually go into a store and buy a cheapie PC to run it on.
Yes, but I didn't spend $300 on my system. And AROS has not reached the stability of MorphOS. Isn't it curious that everyone wants to port Fab's MorphOS version of OWB.
Face it, we've got thew most reliable NG OS and the best hardware prices.
Anyone who tries it comes away impressed. Why don't you give it a shot?
-
Out of interest, how much would non-OS4 user's be happy to pay for the 460 so that they could give OS4 a try? Personally, I'd consider anything over 300 EUR a high price, all things considered.
I'm actually very surprised that ACube have even released a new MB, maybe they really do sell most of them to Industry? Then again I was also very surprised about the X1000 announcement and quite a few other things that go on around here ;)
-
Yes, but I didn't spend $300 on my system. And AROS has not reached the stability of MorphOS. Isn't it curious that everyone wants to port Fab's MorphOS version of OWB.
You can get old mac's for a 50, but you still have to shell out the cost of the OS (150 euro still?).
So the cost isn't all that much higher for a PC, and it can do a lot the old mac could never even dream of.
Face it, we've got thew most reliable NG OS and the best hardware prices.
Anyone who tries it comes away impressed. Why don't you give it a shot?
Im sure its the most reliable. I doubt a comparable to G4 PC would run you much more than 50 bucks nowadays either though.
A choice between proprietary and open software is a non-choice to me, so I'll pass, sorry.
EDIT: Not trying to be a snot here either, if that makes any sense? :)
-
Out of interest, how much would non-OS4 user's be happy to pay for the 460 so that they could give OS4 a try? Personally, I'd consider anything over 300 EUR a high price, all things considered.
I'm actually very surprised that ACube have even released a new MB, maybe they really do sell most of them to Industry? Then again I was also very surprised about the X1000 announcement and quite a few other things that go on around here ;)
I'm impressed with both of them. If I could get the SAM460EX without AOS4.1 I'd consider it.
But right now my focus is expanding the MorphOS coder base. Since the SAM460EX has to be purchased with AOS4.1, its not a porting candidate.
Thats odd since Treavor sent an X1000 board to the MorphOS development team a long time ago.
-
In powerpc amiga terms, I am still using a 603e, therefore by the "law of trying to compensate for other inadequacies", I clearly have the biggest manhood.
I have a broken bppc 175mhz 603e/25 mhz '040 card.... not only the crappiest bppc available for amiga but also dead. Do I win ? :)
-
I have a broken bppc 175mhz 603e/25 mhz '040 card.... not only the crappiest bppc available for amiga but also dead. Do I win ? :)
Can you code? Read my post.
-
Backtracking a little, but the term "custom hardware" gets thrown around a bit as a pro for OS4.x. Now each to his own, but this seems clutching as straws to me. There's next to nothing interesting about these systems in terms of custom hardware, it's predomiantely industry standard gear. I know that "arguement" gets thrown around a bit too, but it happens to be true. For my tastes value can be added to a system if it offers something different. I actually find super aga more interesting (even if Im pretty dubious on natami) than industry standard gfx cards for example, and would pay a little more for it than I would more powerful standard pci/agp/pci express cards..... this type of custom hardware does have a little bit of additional value, but apart from running os4.x the "custom hardware" for that OS offers nothing interesting that should increase its price, or even be consider something for the pro category (infact it's probably in the con list for my tastes considering the price).
And before someone assumes otherwise, no, Im not a MOS user (yet, I may buy in one day), and yes I am interested in OS4 still, although so far the whole thing has reeked of incompetence in most areas,... product choices/prices/long winded courtcases/arguements with parent company/technical merrits vs. similar products/etc.
There's a reason people regularly voice thier discontent with OS4.x, and that's simply because there's plenty to be discontent about.
-
Can you code? Read my post.
Im no Fab, Deadwood, Mschulz, etc. but I try :) I've done a fair few ports of software to AROS (Dosbox, Bochs, and a few dozen others) and have done lots of original bits and pieces for the classics as well as ports. My real interest is in creating original stuff rather than ports though (am currently working on an original 2d paint package).
I did see your initiative to get some mos systems in the hands of coders and was interested, but didnt bother responding as my talents are somewhat modest vs. the above sorts of people I mentioned :)
-
A question for u OS4 die hards, when is too much too much? 1000 dollar motherboard 1 GHz motherboard, 2000 dollar 2 GHz motherboard, would you pay 3000 dollars for a 3 GHz mobo?
Never thought about it like that before $1 per mhz. at least I know where my money going :)
But all seriousness, I can only speak for myself, I'm not daft I have questioned the price of Amigaos4 and it hardware its a shame but this is what is cost to get more customized, industry or specialised hardware what ever you want to call it, now should they port OS4 to cheap ppc hardware like Macs, well they could do that, but how much of a future would that gives us, its not massively helped MorphOS improve its market share. And once they do get the AmigaOS4 on all the PPC mac hardware there is, where do we go from then?
I see the only real future for OS4 and morphOS to either make their own hardware or port the OS to a different cheaper processor and try and compete their, but little point in doing that as we already have Aros doing x86 and ARM processors soon.
At the end of the day I like OS4 it not cheap, and the AmigaONE X1000 maybe too much for me to justify I think my limit is around £1,500 to £2,000 mark, now its looking less and less likely that even this price is going to be achievable but if it is too much at least there is an alternative for me to join in OS4 world thanks to the sams boards [/FONT]
-
You can get old mac's for a 50, but you still have to shell out the cost of the OS (150 euro still?).:)
The MorphOS key file is 111 € (http://www.morphos-team.net/faq.html) (includes VAT).
Also you can test MorphOS for free for as long as you like, 30 minutes at a time. After each 30 minute session the system slows down and you can reboot for another 30 minute testing period. There are no other limitations.
-
The equipment that both MOS and OS4 runs on are pretty outdated by now.
Is the bickering really worth it anymore? :(
Hey, I want a Detroit Lions Vs Buffalo Bills game, none of this Super Bowl nonsense. I want the worst of the worst to have it out, and settle it for all to see
Go Lions:hammer: Go Bills:hammer: The crowd will break all records
for fewest people to care about showing up. All the petty :bitch: for all these years,
the wasted energy, wasted resources, opportunity squandered...makes the
Commodore bankruptcy look like the brilliance in comparison. :)
Mediocrity is the bitter fruit of independance.
-
Saying Amiga is crap is weird argument to spend thousands of dollars.
Yes it might sound strange but it's a hobby and i'm insane so it's worth it, but i wouldn't recommend it to anyone sane to even look at anything that has anything to do with aos/aros/morphos.
It's a pain to use them compared to the mainstream alternatives and it's a pain to have several computers just to run different os'es. But it's so exciting to follow all the improvements in my beloved OS from my childhood when Aos was king even if it's lightyears behind now. Aros and morphos has no roots for me even if i have been using it for many years now (have only tested aros quickly a few times). It sucked from the beginning and it sucks now.
-
But it's so exciting to follow all the improvements in my beloved OS from my childhood when Aos was king even if it's lightyears behind now. Aros and morphos has no roots for me even if i have been using it for many years now (have only tested aros quickly a few times). It sucked from the beginning and it sucks now.
That is going to change when UAE users adopt new AROS/68k.
-
Out of interest, how much would non-OS4 user's be happy to pay for the 460 so that they could give OS4 a try? Personally, I'd consider anything over 300 EUR a high price, all things considered.
300EUR (incl. German VAT of 19%) is my maximum. That would be 5 times the price of an D510 itx-Atom board (which all in all is better spec'd than the Sam460).
http://shop.e-bug.de/shop/product_info.php?info=p238816&refID=FR
I'm actually very surprised that ACube have even released a new MB, maybe they really do sell most of them to Industry?
That would be interesting to know. Some ppl claim they do, but there is very little evidence for that on the net...
-
In powerpc amiga terms, I am still using a 603e, therefore by the "law of trying to compensate for other inadequacies", I clearly have the biggest manhood.
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
-
300EUR (incl. German VAT of 19%) is my maximum. That would be 5 times the price of an D510 itx-Atom board (which all in all is better spec'd than the Sam460).
http://shop.e-bug.de/shop/product_info.php?info=p238816&refID=FR
That would be interesting to know. Some ppl claim they do, but there is very little evidence for that on the net...
Not everything is put on the net for everyone to find out mind you.
-
Thats odd since Treavor sent an X1000 board to the MorphOS development team a long time ago.
No, he did not. We were never interested in getting one in the first place.
-
300EUR (incl. German VAT of 19%) is my maximum. That would be 5 times the price of an D510 itx-Atom board (which all in all is better spec'd than the Sam460).
http://shop.e-bug.de/shop/product_info.php?info=p238816&refID=FR
..
hey you just might get a Blizzard PPC card for that price with luck:afro:
-
I beggining to wonder is I should sell mine, been sitting unused in my miggy for years.
What you reckon a 603e/175 040/25 and Bvision would go for ?
-
Actually, Altivec isn't irrelevant. It is used (albeit not as extensively as I'd like) in MiniGL, the avcodec library, and IIRC, some other parts of the OS too. Even if it weren't used at present, it's important enough that Freescale have finally decided to add it to their QorIQ range of processors. About time! It would be nice if Applied Micro could follow suit; their new dual-core PowerPC processor would be a lot more interesting if it included altivec.
The Sam 460ex is meant to be a low-end machine. It may not have altivec, but it's still a nice machine. It's a good step up from the Sam 440 series, and I prefer it over my A1-XE G4. Why? Mainly because of the PCI-Express bus and faster RAM.
Having said that, I'm still getting an A1-X1000.
Hans
+1
I think the faster bus and gpu will give it quite a gaming edge over Macs once good 3d drivers are done!
-
By the time its released I would imagine the last of the line of the PPC macs will be supported, and from what I can gather there will be very little difference between them and the X1000, excepet of course about £2k in price :)
-
hey you just might get a Blizzard PPC card for that price with luck:afro:
For 300 EUR I can easily get a 1500MHz G4 Mac mini (which is significantly faster than the Atom) plus a MorphOS license. No need for old 603 stuff...
-
By the time its released I would imagine the last of the line of the PPC macs will be supported, and from what I can gather there will be very little difference between them and the X1000, excepet of course about £2k in price :)
As I've mentioned before, the fastest PPC Mac (G5) used DDR2-533 memory.
The X1000 should outperform it. The SAM460 already outperforms a G4 1.5Ghz on large memory intensive tasks.
They both support modern graphics cards that will never see the light of day on Mac hardware so they will have a gaming edge for 3D.
The classic Amigas were faster in there day than PCs because the cpu had fast custom chips supporting it. SAM460 and X1000 have faster "custom" chips (and bus) than the Macs...and by "custom", I mean every chip that is not the cpu.
There is also something to be said for *new* vs. *used*.
Personally, I don't see why MOS isn't ported to SAM440/460. People in particular currently owning 440's may be selling them in order to upgrade to the 460... People already in possession of a SAM would be making a conscious decision to support MOS so I don't see why the powers that be simply don't do it. Gotta love politics...
-
Well I heard they were porting MorphOS to the GC and Wii next
-
I guess we should all laugh at everyone that bought a Minimig!
Those suckers paid >$42/Mhz...
/fail
I own 3 cars. A 1997 Corvette and 2 1987 Fiero GT's. I've spent more on the Fieros (each) than the Corvette. It's a hobby. Prices are irrelevant.
People complaining about prices need a new hobby.
-
Well I heard they were porting MorphOS to the GC and Wii next
Then I'd actually try it out using hardware I actually own. What a novel concept.
I also love how everytime I say something you don't agree with and can't counter, you go into stupid-troll mode.
-
The SAM460 already outperforms a G4 1.5Ghz on large memory intensive tasks.
Really? What are you basing this on?
The numbers I've seen are:
SAM460 AMCC460 1.167GHz
---> RAM <---
READ32: 311 MB/Sec
READ64: 310 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 521 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 521 MB/Sec
WRITE: 1251 MB/Sec (Tricky)
Mac Mini 7447 1.5GHz
---> RAM <---
READ32: 387 MB/Sec
READ64: 403 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 771 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 771 MB/Sec
WRITE: 809 MB/Sec (Tricky)
(source (http://www.morphzone.org/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=7001&start=483))
-
Really? What are you basing this on?
The numbers I've seen are:
SAM460 AMCC460 1.167GHz
---> RAM <---
READ32: 311 MB/Sec
READ64: 310 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 521 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 521 MB/Sec
WRITE: 1251 MB/Sec (Tricky)
Mac Mini 7447 1.5GHz
---> RAM <---
READ32: 387 MB/Sec
READ64: 403 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 771 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 771 MB/Sec
WRITE: 809 MB/Sec (Tricky)
By your own listing there, the last write speed listed was 50% higher probably because it involves writing to main ram. If these tests were performed using local cache then the Mac will win. Writing to actually RAM and reading from actual ram should be faster on the SAM as someone else posted earlier.
Anyone can make a test that is more favorable to one platform or the other.
I'll wait for some real world benchmarks.
The fact of the matter is it will talk faster to the gpu, like it or not. SAM460 will *feel* faster than it's 1.15MHz.
SAM
---> VIDEO BUS <---
READ: 72 MB/Sec
WRITE: 261 MB/Sec
MAC
---> VIDEO BUS <---
READ: 32 MB/Sec
WRITE: 180 MB/Sec
Even your posting was biased...sad...
-
dont forget the video ram numbers too
-
I think you are wrong. The Mac will actually be faster in real world use and fell faster due to MoprhOS being a quicker OS than AOS4.
I go into troll mode with you when I get bored of your views which you dont ever back up with actual evidence. And jsut to remind myself and other people the rubbish you are capable of coming up with.
The Mac Mini video bus is the weak link. But thats not an issue on other macs.
-
dont forget the video ram numbers too
Better yet, Quake III and Blender benchmarks for real life speed.
-
I think you are wrong. The Mac will actually be faster in real world use and fell faster due to MoprhOS being a quicker OS than AOS4.
I go into troll mode with you when I get bored of your views which you dont ever back up with actual evidence. And jsut to remind myself and other people the rubbish you are capable of coming up with.
So you finally admit being a troll. Quoted for accuracy.
The bottomline is I have actual hardware and software experience. I am employed in a technical position. I've been an IT admin and am currently a developer. I did take courses in Computer Engineering. People like you can understand simple concepts.
Fact: Quake3 will run faster on a SAM460 than on a G4 and that is directly because of video card performance. Please return to your bridge.
-
Better yet, Quake III and Blender benchmarks for real life speed.
Despite the updated PCI bus drivers on SAM440, it did not improve Quake 3 there. Quake 3 loads everything it needs into the gpu at the start of the level. The gpu is the limiting factor in games using 3D like that. Sam460 supports faster gpus than are possible on Macs and Sam440.
-
People like me can understand simple concepts. Just as well I am not a programmer for a living then., oh wait there, thats what I do
-
People like me can understand simple concepts. Just as well I am not a programmer for a living then., oh wait there, thats what I do
Then counter with reasonable arguments instead of trolling...
-
By your own listing there, the last write speed listed was 50% higher probably because it involves writing to main ram. If these tests were performed using local cache then the Mac will win.
All of these tests go to main memory. There are separate tests to L1 and L2 caches. Ask Crisot for details.
Anyone can make a test that is more favorable to one platform or the other.
This test was created by Crisot, OS4 user. The test was run on SAM460 by OS4 beta tester. Sure you could blame me for trying to use my mind control powers to affect these people but you give me way too much credit.
Even your posting was biased...sad.
Pot, kettle.
-
All of these tests go to main memory. There are separate tests to L1 and L2 caches. Ask Crisot for details.
This test was created by Crisot, OS4 user. The test was run by OS4 beta tester. Sure you could blame me for trying to use my mind control powers to affect these people but you give me way too much credit.
Pot, kettle.
Here is my view.
I don't care what OS SAM460 is running.
SAM460 will run 3D intensive games better than any Mac regardless of what OS is on the Mac.
Nothing is stopping you from porting to it. Instead you make it an OS issue of AOS4 vs. MOS. It's old already.
-
Here is my view.
I don't care what OS SAM460 is running.
SAM460 will run 3D intensive games better than any Mac regardless of what OS is on the Mac.
My 2009 MacPro would like a word with you...
-
My 2009 MacPro would like a word with you...
Oh? I guess you forget that we are still on planet PPC in Amigaland...
-
My 2009 MacPro would like a word with you...
You just made me LOL
-
SAM460 will run 3D intensive games better than any Mac regardless of what OS is on the Mac.
I think what matters the most is what you have available today. With currently available drivers MorphOS 3D runs circles around this sam460.
By time time some sort of 3D support will be available for Sam460 MorphOS might have new 3D drivers released. They already run quake3 150fps on puny Radeon 9200.
I won't even bother splitting hairs about using PCIE<->PCI bridge and all that nonsense which might allow Macs to use some yet unknown future gfxcard.
-
@lou_dias
So any comment on as to why this Sam460 with supposedly superior memory bus loses to 6+ year old Mac mini G4? Or did we change the subject already?
The SAM460 already outperforms a G4 1.5Ghz on large memory intensive tasks.
So again, what are you basing this claim on? Or did you just assume something here without actually checking?
-
I think what matters the most is what you have available today. With currently available drivers MorphOS 3D runs circles around this sam460.
By time time some sort of 3D support will be available for Sam460 MorphOS might have new 3D drivers released. They already run quake3 150fps on puny Radeon 9200.
I won't even bother splitting hairs about using PCIE<->PCI bridge and all that nonsense which might allow Macs to use some yet unknown future gfxcard.
If a bridge is still limited to PCI speeds. I'm glad you are basing Mac power on this 'magic bridge'...
-
@lou_dias
So any comment on as to why this Sam460 with supposedly superior memory bus loses to 6+ year old Mac mini G4? Or did we change the subject already?
So again, what are you basing this claim on? Or did you just assume something here without actually checking?
I know memory allocation on OS4 is slower than MOS, so I really don't dispute the data.
I told you the OS is irrelevant to me. Regardless, despite OS4's inefficiency, it still beat the G4 on some tests.
In the ones that matter to me where real world benefits can clearly be seen (read gpu speeds) the Mac loses.
If a task takes 50% cpu power on a SAM but only 33% cpu power on a Mac and they complete in virtually the same amount of time, I don't see a difference, but when a game like Quake 3 can run at much higher framerates on the SAM460 because the actual cpu overhead of that game can even be handled by a Sam440, then I see a difference.
Understand?
-
I know memory allocation on OS4 is slower than MOS, so I really don't dispute the data.
I told you the OS is irrelevant to me. Regardless, despite OS4's inefficiency, it still beat the G4 on some tests.
Oh interesting. Now if you'd just tell me what memory allocation speed has to do with memory access performance? I don't quite follow.
In the ones that matter to me where real world benefits can clearly be seen (read gpu speeds) the Mac loses.
Lets check again once the GPU is actually used for anything. You know... in real world.
-
Quake 3 loads everything it needs into the gpu at the start of the level.
Actually with quake3 only textures are loaded to the graphics card memory.
Everything else is transferred per frame, and this accounts to typically several hundreds of KB of data up to 1MB.
Also since these transfers are synchronous on current OS4 3D system the CPU is busy performing these transfers. MorphOS 3D system uses asynchronous AGP transfers leaving the CPU free to perform other tasks.
-
Oh interesting. Now if you'd just tell me what memory allocation speed has to do with memory access performance? I don't quite follow.
Lets check again once the GPU is actually used for anything. You know... in real world.
Look, the SAM beat the Mac in many of the write tests:
L1 WRITE64: 8882 MB/Sec
vs
L1 WRITE64: 3794 MB/Sec
for example. Mac only beats the read tests by about 20% but in some of the write tests the SAM wins by a wider margin.
So yes, overall I would say I'll take the SAM particularly because it killed the mac on video bus speed.
You tell me what's more important in a cpu: reading or writing data to memory?
I say both. So to me I don't see the G4 with an advantage here. Getting info into a cpu is useless without getting it out as well.
My advice: port MOS to SAM460...then compare Apples to SAMs...and increase your potential available hardware at the same time.
-
Actually with quake3 only textures are loaded to the graphics card memory.
Everything else is transferred per frame, and this accounts to typically several hundreds of KB of data up to 1MB.
Also since these transfers are synchronous on current OS4 3D system the CPU is busy performing these transfers. MorphOS 3D system uses asynchronous AGP transfers leaving the CPU free to perform other tasks.
Texture mapping is the bulk of what the gpu is doing. They get loaded once into the gpu at the start of the level. The level is fixed. Only the players "move". The level is much bigger than the players. The rendering is done on the gpu based the camera position passed from the cpu and player positioning. Please don't twist things. The cpu is reading player input and keeping track of the two combatants and bullets. Once the level starts, the bandwidth used to send data to the gpu is low. It boils down to the gpu being able to render the scene without dropping frames.
On the DV player, data is constantly being streamed over the to the GPU for displaying hence the bigger improvement in framerates via the PCI bus driver upgrade.
Stop making it an OS issue when it's mostly a hardware issue. SAM440 is underpowered. We know this. SAM460 is much better hardware than only the cpu comparison over the '440 shows.
-
Look, the SAM beat the Mac in many of the write tests:
L1 WRITE64: 8882 MB/Sec
vs
L1 WRITE64: 3794 MB/Sec
Oh, can you tell me what cache speed has to do with system bus speed?
-
The level is fixed. Only the players "move". The level is much bigger than the players. The rendering is done on the gpu based the camera position passed from the cpu and player positioning. Please don't twist things. The cpu is reading player input and keeping track of the two combatants and bullets. Once the level starts, the bandwidth used to send data to the gpu is low.
This is not how Quake3 works. Quake3 doesn't keep any static data on the GPU other than the textures. The current frame is calculated with the CPU and then this geometry is uploaded to the GPU for rendering. This amounts to considerable traffic. With OS4 this leads into major slowdowns due to CPU being busy uploading the data.
Stop making it an OS issue when it's mostly a hardware issue. SAM440 is underpowered.
It very much is an OS issue. OS4 3D drivers are very very slow. It has little to do with HW.
This is easily validated by comparing Pegasos 2 with Radeon 9250 first by booting into MorphOS and then AmigaOS4. MorphOS is more than twice as fast as OS4 running quake3. This is common knowledge.
-
Oh, can you tell me what cache speed has to do with system bus speed?
Plenty. That's what the cpu's working with until a flush is required.
-
This is not how Quake3 works. Quake3 doesn't keep any static data on the GPU other than the textures. The current frame is calculated with the CPU and then this geometry is uploaded to the GPU for rendering. This amounts to considerable traffic. With OS4 this leads into major slowdowns due to CPU being busy uploading the data.
It very much is an OS issue. OS4 3D drivers are very very slow. It has little to do with HW.
This is easily validated by comparing Pegasos 2 with Radeon 9250 first by booting into MorphOS and then AmigaOS4. MorphOS is more than twice as fast as OS4. This is common knowledge.
I fail to see how OS boot speed has anything to do with the price of tea in China.
-
Plenty. That's what the cpu's working with until a flush is required.
Those benchmarks do not flush to memory at all, they work inside the cache. The L1 cache performance numbers have nothing to do with memory bus performance.
As I've mentioned before, the fastest PPC Mac (G5) used DDR2-533 memory.
So if we're talking about the memory performance clearly we're not interested about the CPU internal cache. Or did we again change the subject?
-
I fail to see how OS boot speed has anything to do with the price of tea in China.
to run quake3 was missing from my post. Fixed it.
You still argue that it's a HW issue?
Also I still don't understand how memory allocation speed affects the memory access speed.
-
Those benchmarks do not flush to memory at all, they work inside the cache. The L1 cache performance numbers have nothing to do with memory bus performance.
So if we're talking about the memory performance clearly we're not interested about the CPU internal cache. Or did we again change the subject?
No, but they have everything to do with cpu performance which you cite as poor on the SAM460 though it clearly beats the G4 in a # of aspects.
-
to run quake3 was missing from my post. Fixed it.
You still argue that it's a HW issue?
Also I still don't understand how memory allocation speed affects the memory access speed.
I suppose if I had an OS4 and MOS box then I could see what you mean.
As for memory allocation speed, when initiating any transfer, is this step not required? I don't know the size of the transfers in question but let's say they were done in 1k chunks. The memory must be allocated for the transfer to begin. If the tests included those requests then they would be skewed towards the OS with the most efficient allocator.
The smaller the chunk, the more exagerated the results of the the transfer.
On a lower level, was the OS4 transfer done in full DDR2 burst mode? If not you wont' see speeds over DDR1. There's alot of variables here.
Is the FPGA in the SAM460 the memory interface? It may not be operating in burst mode yet.
All in all, I think you are prematurely bashing the hardware as an excuse to clandestinely bash the OS it's running on. So, I repeat: port to SAM460 then tell us how bad it is...
-
As for memory allocation speed, when initiating any transfer, is this step not required?
Of course it is not. These memory speed benchmarks only allocate the buffer once, and this time spent allocating the memory is not accounted.
I don't know the size of the transfers in question but let's say they were done in 1k chunks. The memory must be allocated for the transfer to begin. If the tests included those requests then they would be skewed towards the OS with the most efficient allocator.
The smaller the chunk, the more exagerated the results of the the transfer.
You're seriously confused.
On a lower level, was the OS4 transfer done in full DDR2 burst mode? If not you wont' see speeds over DDR1.
If that is the case then this SAM460 has a lot more problems the issues listed so far...
-
Those benchmarks do not flush to memory at all, they work inside the cache. The L1 cache performance numbers have nothing to do with memory bus performance.
So if we're talking about the memory performance clearly we're not interested about the CPU internal cache. Or did we again change the subject?
Aren't you the one changing the subject?
You called the SAM460 a poor performer.
Test show in some aspects it outpeforms a G4 Mac...
A G4 Mac does not even use DDR2 to my knowledge. The memory test you posted is questional in the sense that I don't know if the memory controller in the '460 is actually running in burst mode because if it did, I would expect the memory tests to have favored it.
You then tried to blame to OS...which we know is your ultimate goal.
I pointed out that it may at some point outperform a G5 Mac on memory transfers since it used at best DDR2-533 and SAM460 *might* support faster memory (ala DDR2-800 or 1033) and also support faster video cards since is has native PCIex16 support.
So, no the SAM460 doesn't have Altivec, but it still has more than enough juice to hold it's own.
-
Of course it is not. These memory speed benchmarks only allocate the buffer once, and this time spent allocating the memory is not accounted.
You're seriously confused.
If that is the case then this SAM460 has a lot more problems the issues listed so far...
If the fpga is the memory controller then it can be fixed. This may have skewed the test to begin with and yes is limiting the OS now. *now* but perhaps not *later*.
-
Aren't you the one changing the subject?
I think I have been quite consistent.
I would expect the memory tests to have favored it.
I think we're getting to the core of the issue here. You expected something to to be true, made a bogus claim and now are unwilling to back off and admit your mistake.
You then tried to blame to OS...which we know is your ultimate goal.
I didn't bring quake3 to this thread. I merely commented your contradictory and clearly bogus claims.
-
If the fpga is the memory controller then it can be fixed.
The memory controller is inside the AMCC460 CPU.
On-chip DDR1/2 SDRAM controller with 32/64-bit interface, up to 3.2 GBps peak data rate and optional ECC (http://www.apm.com/products/embedded/singlecore460/ppc460ex/)
-
I think I have been quite consistent.
Opinions vary.
I think we're getting to the core of the issue here. You expected something to to be true, made a bogus claim and now are unwilling to back off and admit your mistake.
What mistake? The Mac uses DDR1, SAM460 uses DDR2. @ 400 rating DDR1 will outperform DDR2 at the same rating because of latency and overhead. If SAM460 can use memory faster than DDR2-400 then it will outperform the G4's DDR-400 memory. These are facts.
From the source I didn't see what memories were used. From the results, it looks like we are comparing DDR-400 to DDR2-400.
Let's see what happens when faster memory is used in the SAM, shall we?
I didn't bring quake3 to this thread. I merely commented your contradictory and clearly bogus claims.
I didn't bring it into the thread either and wasn't replying to you on it. I still stand by the fact that the bulk of the processing is due to the work done on the gpu. You can look at MacOS running Quake 3 and see that on the same hardware it's twice as fast as MOS. So while yes the driver is not good on OS4, it's still not perfect on MOS and that to see an improvement in the actual video card used will still result in a direct improvement of the framerate more than a mild improvement in the PCI bus. You simply just spun that into another reason to bash OS4 where as the poster was curious as to what to expect with OS4's Quake 3 port on SAM460 over the SAM440...
-
If SAM460 can use memory faster than DDR2-400 then it will outperform the G4's DDR-400 memory. These are facts.
According to Applied Micro the AMCC460 does max DDR2-400 (peak speed 3200 MB/s). Mac mini G4 uses 166MHz bus though so DDR-333. That evens up the situation a bit, but for some reason Mac mini G4 still is faster.
You can look at MacOS running Quake 3 and see that on the same hardware it's twice as fast as MOS. So while yes the driver is not good on OS4, it's still not perfect on MOS
Until RadeonHD has 3D drivers the whole question of Quake 3 performance is academic anyway.
And just as a final remark the work in progress MorphOS 3D drivers already run Quake 3 faster than Mac OS X.
-
I pointed out that it may at some point outperform a G5 Mac on memory transfers since it used at best DDR2-533 and SAM460 *might* support faster memory (ala DDR2-800 or 1033) and also support faster video cards since is has native PCIex16 support.
in actuality, its a 4x pcie-lane, and once you take protocol overhead out of the 4x lane, it pushes the same amount as the macmini agp 4x slot. so any of the g4/g5 macs that have an agp 8x slot can push more video bandwidth than the sam460.
iirc, pcie 4x lane minus the overhead is about 1000mb/s, agp 4x is about 1033 or 1066 mbs but I dont recall if the agp 4x numbers are with protocol overhead removed.
-
According to Applied Micro the AMCC460 does max DDR2-400 (peak speed 3200 MB/s). Mac mini G4 uses 166MHz bus though so DDR-333. That evens up the situation a bit, but for some reason Mac mini G4 still is faster.
Until RadeonHD has 3D drivers the whole question of Quake 3 performance is academic anyway.
And just as a final remark the work in progress MorphOS 3D drivers already run Quake 3 faster than Mac OS X.
From what I read:
400 MHz clock DDR2 memory controller
If this refers to the i/o bus then it's DDR2-800. The internal memory clock is 200MHz for DDR2-800...
There appears to be some confusion about what it actually supports via the wording. System designers usually only reference the internal or bus clock and not the "labelling".
Basically, whomever ran the tests should drop in some DDR2-800 (as it won't hurt anyways) and rerun the tests.
Kudos on improved 3D drivers.
-
in actuality, its a 4x pcie-lane, and once you take protocol overhead out of the 4x lane, it pushes the same amount as the macmini agp 4x slot. so any of the g4/g5 macs that have an agp 8x slot can push more video bandwidth than the sam460.
iirc, pcie 4x lane minus the overhead is about 1000mb/s, agp 4x is about 1033 or 1066 mbs but I dont recall if the agp 4x numbers are with protocol overhead removed.
PCI-E is a serial connection. With data transfer going bi-directional. 16X up and down...while AGP is 8X only one way at a time.
-
There appears to be some confusion about what it actually supports via the wording. System designers usually only reference the internal or bus clock and not the "labelling".
Applied Micro says "up to 3.2 GBps peak data rate (http://www.apm.com/products/embedded/singlecore460/ppc460ex/)". This translates to DDR2-400 (PC2-3200, 100MHz memory bus (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/DDR2_SDRAM#Specification_standards)).
-
Applied Micro says "up to 3.2 GBps peak data rate (http://www.apm.com/products/embedded/singlecore460/ppc460ex/)". This translates to DDR2-400 (PC2-3200, 100MHz memory bus (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/DDR2_SDRAM#Specification_standards)).
Interesting, that site lists 1.0GHz max.
I wonder if ACUBE downclocked the bus but increased the cpu multiplier to achieve 1.16 GHz... That would explain the poorer memory performance...
-
The MorphOS key file is 111 € (http://www.morphos-team.net/faq.html) (includes VAT).
ah, the wiki is wrong then, thank you for the correction.
It works out to 150 US dollars, plus whatever the cost of an old mac turns out be (lets figure 50 bucks for the G4 types). More than I am really comfortable with for something that doesn't have nostalgic value for me, particularly compared to the cost of a linux system on comparable kit.
If you guys support the G4 powerbooks within the next half year or so, once my wife retires hers for a new laptop in the summer, I promise I'll give it a shot. Don't want to mess with it at the moment, since she gets pretty particular about her computer. :madashell:
Also you can test MorphOS for free for as long as you like, 30 minutes at a time. After each 30 minute session the system slows down and you can reboot for another 30 minute testing period. There are no other limitations.
Nobody told me the trial had windows emulation :roflmao:
-
@piru
You're the ONE & ONLY reason i'll never get a mos license.
-
@piru
You're the ONE & ONLY reason i'll never get a mos license.
-
If you guys support the G4 powerbooks within the next half year or so, once my wife retires hers for a new laptop in the summer, I promise I'll give it a shot.
MorphOS will probably support only the 1.67 GHz and the later 1.5 GHz. The earlier models don't use usb for kbd/tp. Hence, if your wife's pb doesn't happen to be a 1.67 GHz or 1.5 GHz (usb) model, it will not fit for MorphOS.
-
MorphOS will probably support only the 1.67 GHz and the later 1.5 GHz. The earlier models don't use usb for kbd/tp. Hence, if your wife's pb doesn't happen to be a 1.67 GHz or 1.5 GHz (usb) model, it will not fit for MorphOS.
it was one of the last G4 laptops they made but I dunno. I'd have to check.
-
@lou_dias
Can you tell me where are these "faster custom chips" on the sam boards or x1000?
-
I am amazed that this discussion still rages on. The SAM460EX comes with AmigaOS 4.1 (you have to buy it that way) and will probably never run MorphOS.
And the G4 Macs and the 460EX are, at similar clock speeds, virtually on par with each other in terms of performance.
Why is there such unnecessary friction betwen these two camps?
Acube won't even sell this board without AOS4 unless you are one of their 'industrial partners.
Why can't we just leave this one alone?
-
@Iggy
I completely agree. Sadly some people, who clearly have no interest in OS4 and never will be interested in it, seem to feel the need to take every opportunity to create threads for the sole purpose of bashing OS4 and/or OS4 hardware.
I, for one, have every intention of buying a Sam460 and stupids threads like this are not going to change my mind. The only thing these threads accomplish is to annoy people and make enemies. It's time to give it a rest and let things be the way they are.
-
it was threads like these that caused so many Amiga users to leave the scene in the first place.
constant willy waving about who's outdated piece of hardware could run which outdated 3d game the fastest.
buy what you like, and enjoy it.
-
Opinions vary.
No. It is just your skewed opinion, which is different.
What mistake? The Mac uses DDR1, SAM460 uses DDR2. @ 400 rating DDR1 will outperform DDR2 at the same rating because of latency and overhead. If SAM460 can use memory faster than DDR2-400 then it will outperform the G4's DDR-400 memory. These are facts.
Facts end at "SAM460 uses DDR2". The rest are just your speculations. Especially stating facts starting the sentence from "if" is amusing.
-
-deleted-
-
Webtigers, they tend to lack social skills and a general life.
But I garee with you 100%, its sad to see people like this, use so much time and energy to bash.
Well, look from their perspective. They have the reason to trash the new Amiga hardware about its price and speed. Because a person who reads this thread would eventually decide against AmigaOne hardware and buy Mac then end up buying MorphOS license = profit for the OP.
So, the time spend on posting on this forum is well calculated and even if 1% of the people who read it, decide to go for Mac instead of AmigaOne, it's directly filling their pockets.
-
I'd just call this thread 'stating the obvious', but not the obvious.
I could point out many things that are expensive in shops and the cheaper alternatives all day long.
Some people pay thousands of pounds for a bit of crockery or art at an auction. Why? Maybe as an investment of sorts, but more often than not... simply because they WANT TO or CAN and have an interest in the piece. Are they mad for doing so?
If you're passionate about something and have a keen interest, you will support it and will pay money to support it. Simple. We are all individuals.
Alas, it's human nature to disagree over such things.
Tiresome? Definitely.
Steve
-
Well, look from their perspective. They have the reason to trash the new Amiga hardware about its price and speed. Because a person who reads this thread would eventually decide against AmigaOne hardware and buy Mac then end up buying MorphOS license = profit for the OP.
So, the time spend on posting on this forum is well calculated and even if 1% of the people who read it, decide to go for Mac instead of AmigaOne, it's directly filling their pockets.
Well, if this would be so, it would be a very poor thing to do..
-
I am amazed that this discussion still rages on. The SAM460EX comes with AmigaOS 4.1 (you have to buy it that way) and will probably never run MorphOS.
And the G4 Macs and the 460EX are, at similar clock speeds, virtually on par with each other in terms of performance.
Why is there such unnecessary friction betwen these two camps?
Acube won't even sell this board without AOS4 unless you are one of their 'industrial partners.
Why can't we just leave this one alone?
If I had to cast a guess I'd say it's simply because various people in either camp see any progress in their counterpart camp(s) as a threat to their interests.
You'll rarely see a forum conversation about the benefits of MorphOS that don't end up with a long list of points about it's superiority to OS4. Likewise, you'll not see a conversation about the benefits of OS4 without it being the "legitimate" successor being used as arguments against MorphOS. It's as if advocates on either side can't actually extol the benefits of their preferred platform in isolation.
In the end, the only people on the planet with even the slightest interest in using either MorphOS or OS4 are existing/former Amiga users. If I were a gambling man (which I'm not but nevertheless...), I'd put money on there not a single soul in either camp having come from the "outside" with no prior Amiga experience.
That makes a very small market for your product, in which a sale for the "other guy" almost always represent a loss of a sale for you (except for those of us that actually want both). In that environment, I guess you have to expect a degree of competition bashing - it's a basic survival strategy.
If you want to see an end to this nonsense, we'll all have spread cash (and love) and buy both ;)
-
@Iggy
I completely agree. Sadly some people, who clearly have no interest in OS4 and never will be interested in it, seem to feel the need to take every opportunity to create threads for the sole purpose of bashing OS4 and/or OS4 hardware.
I, for one, have every intention of buying a Sam460 and stupids threads like this are not going to change my mind. The only thing these threads accomplish is to annoy people and make enemies. It's time to give it a rest and let things be the way they are.
+1
This is why I recently asked the question if these people want to see the AmigaONE X1000 project to fail with clearly so many people dont like the root Hyperion have decided to go with OS4, I'm glad most dont want it to just fail even if its completely stupid idea from their point of view. But when you get threads like these I cant help but feel that deep down they would like OS4 to flop to allow MorphOS or what ever they support to become the main stream ng amiga which I think is a shame as I think any camp/developer/manufacture (like acube and aeon) that is willing to still try and support the Amiga community (any part of the community) deserver a bit more respect and not the bashing some people give out (even C=USA too a point.)
-
Because a person who reads this thread would eventually decide against AmigaOne hardware and buy Mac then end up buying MorphOS license = profit for the OP.
People are of course free to express their opinion about me but here I must take an exception. I am not getting any "profit" from this. I have never collected any money from the MorphOS registrations and I don't intend to do so in the future. My financial status allows me to keep my hobby that: a hobby.
The money from the registrations is mostly used to keep the web site, registration server and other support infrastructure running. It is also used to obtain hardware for potential future ports.
Any claims that I would somehow get financial benefit from this is clearly nonsense.
So, the time spend on posting on this forum is well calculated ... it's directly filling their pockets.
Frankly, I find this just offensive.
-
People are of course free to express their opinion about me but here I must take an exception. I am not getting any "profit" from this.
Since when MorphOS became non profit (i.e FREE)? I must have missed the news. Please point me where to download full UNRESTRICTED version of MorphOS for FREE?
-
I think Piru is saying he does not get paid at all for being a MorphOS dev, pretty easy to understand I think
-
I think Piru is saying he does not get paid at all for being a MorphOS dev, pretty easy to understand I think
Pirus post:
Last edited by Piru; Today at 12:48 PM..
My post:
Today 12:38 PM
drHirudo
Shall I edit my posts in order to gain credibility?
-
all he addded to the post was
"The money from the registrations is mostly used to keep the web site, registration server and other support infrastructure running. It is also used to obtain hardware for potential future ports.
Any claims that I would somehow get financial benefit from this is clearly nonsense."
To clarify where the money goes and to back up that he does not get any of it
-
Okay thanks for the clarifications. I stand corrected.
Thanks to the clarifications I know more now.
Now I know that buying AmigaOS products (software and hardware) is helping the Amiga development (software and hardware) instead of giving money for expensive (it seems) web hosting and old Mac hardware.
Purchasing Sam 460 helps Hyperion and Acube develop further as the money goes back to the niche.
Purchasing old Mac helps the initial owner to buy newer model Mac (Intel based) that will not run MorphOS.
Purchasing MorphOS license goes for expensive web hosting (is it the server running on MOS?), purchase of old Mac hardware (that helps the initial owner to buy newer model Mac, that will not run MorphOS) and does not help the MorphOS development at all, because as stated by one of the main devs - its a hobby for him.
All in all - for the people who want to have Amiga now and in the future - better buy Amiga.
-
Shall I edit my posts in order to gain credibility?
You could give it a try, I doubt it would help. It seems reading other peoples posts is causing some problems on your end. ;)
-
... better buy Amiga.
seems all this "amiga" is some kind of charity excercise. but a trusty charity demands transparency. anything else is plain silly.
-
seems all this "amiga" is some kind of charity excercise. but a trusty charity demands transparency. anything else is plain silly.
So, back to the topic name - it says SAM 460 - poor performance, high price
Okay, all the Amiga hardware released after the Amiga 3000, had poor performance and high price. This is nothing new. The Amiga 3000 was the last model that had decent price/performance ratio and even was used as a UNIX workstation (Amiga3000UX), because similar UNIX configurations from other vendors were much more expensive. All the later Amiga models where with poor performance and high price.
Beating own chest, trying to prove something that everyone knows, 20 years after the release of the Amiga CDTV and the Amiga 600, which were disasters and disappointment and already expensive with poor performance is plain silly.
So far the charity exercise, did not help the Commodore survive. All the persons who still use Amiga, know that the hardware is expensive with poor performance, but it does not stop them from buying it.
On the other hand - Mac hardware is also with poor performance and high price, compared to the PC hardware. Be it brand new or second hand.
-
On the other hand - Mac hardware is also with poor performance and high price, compared to the PC hardware. Be it brand new or second hand.
You've forgot about one small fact. Some second hand Mac hardware runs MorphOS. PC hardware does not. Copmaring $80 I've spent on my Power Mac with PC hardware prices is pointless then.
-
All in all - for the people who want to have Amiga now and in the future - better buy Amiga.
Well, the new Amigas are not available yet, but some time this year they will be.
-
Well, the new Amigas are not available yet, but some time this year they will be.
If you mean CUSA products they are only Amiga in name and not anything to do with genuine Amigas... :)
-
it was threads like these that caused so many Amiga users to leave the scene in the first place.
constant willy waving about who's outdated piece of hardware could run which outdated 3d game the fastest.
buy what you like, and enjoy it.
Chase people out of the scene:confused: I don't get that, why would someone give up their hobby because of a forum post?
I have a SuperCPU 128 (C64/C128 accelerator) which I paid a pretty penny for. I have been told it is outdated (it is), I paid too much (YMMV) and people like me are fools wasting money on such hardware (YMMV). Some of the posts and comments are quite sharp, but it has never made me consider giving up my hobby.
I think people sometimes lose sight of what discussion forums are for (not pointing a finger at anyone). They are for discussing ideas, products and such. If it was all one sided rah, rah, rah, it wouldn't be a discussion forum.
If you like OS4 and find Sam460 to be a viable product, by all means purchase one or multiple of them. Acube appear to be an ethical company who back their hardware with real life warranties and perform as advertised.
-
@ Redrumloa
Ahh... the very man to ask, I've had a beady eye on this C128 for a few days now, be grateful if you could have a quick look and tell me what you think of it (it's only got 4 hours left to go...) :)
C128 on eBay... (http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=170594025771&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT#ht_500wt_1156)
-
NO PERSONAL ATTACKS
Stay on topic and keep civil:anger:
-
@ Redrumloa
Ahh... the very man to ask, I've had a beady eye on this C128 for a few days now, be grateful if you could have a quick look and tell me what you think of it (it's only got 4 hours left to go...) :)
C128 on eBay... (http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=170594025771&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT#ht_500wt_1156)
No problem, though if we take this thread far OT I will get roasted:lol:
The listing states it is for a flat C128 only with yellowing, no drives or nothing else? Seems awful expensive, you should be able to find cheaper.
If you would like further advice, no problem just ask in PM.
-
Thanks for the advice, kinda thought that myself, I'll give it a miss then... :)
Sorry for the off topic bit folks... :)
Normal Service Resumes Now... :)
-
Chase people out of the scene:confused: I don't get that, why would someone give up their hobby because of a forum post?
Just because you don't understand something doesn't make it false.
I don't understand why people would do that either but, over the years, I do recall see several posts of people saying something along the lines of, "I'm tired of all this bickering. The Amiga Community is not what it used to be and I no longer find this fun. I'm leaving."
-
Just because you don't understand something doesn't make it false.
I don't understand why people would do that either but, over the years, I do recall see several posts of people saying something along the lines of, "I'm tired of all this bickering. The Amiga Community is not what it used to be and I no longer find this fun. I'm leaving."
Just my opinion, but it would seem like an excuse to leave a hobby they weren't enjoying any longer.
Ideally everyone would get along and disagreements would be minimal, but that never happens in any hobby group or discussion forum.
-
You've forgot about one small fact. Some second hand Mac hardware runs MorphOS. PC hardware does not. Copmaring $80 I've spent on my Power Mac with PC hardware prices is pointless then.
well, said PC could run AROS, as well as a few other options.
Right now on craigslist there's a 2.66 P4, for 50 bucks, with 1 gig of RAM.
AROS would fly on that, and it could easily run linux side by side.
-
AROS is not MorphOS. Just try both and see the difference yourself.
-
This thread has become yet another demonstration of this illustrative guide (http://www.amiga.org/gallery/images/180/1_trollmatrix_final.jpg)...
-
Now I know that buying AmigaOS products (software and hardware) is helping the Amiga development (software and hardware)
Well then, I'll keep an eye on what Commodore makes of their Workbench 5 thing. AFAIK, Commodore is the only one who will release a real Amiga (TM) product (unlike "amigaone" or whatever). If it becomes something suitable for HTPC, I'll definitely consider an Amiga 1000 from them to put in my living room. Commodore seems to be a paying customer to the Amiga IP owner, an honorable behavior, unlike the pack behind "AmigaOS/AmigaOne" who more or less robbed Amiga through a dirty and calculated scheme spanning over several years. I don't really care if Commodore is basing Workbench 5 on Linux. In fact, that makes sense in a way, seen from their point of view.
For my *real* Amiga needs, I'll continue to use MorphOS. That one is the leanest, fastest and most elegant Amiga option ever made, it's probably very similar to what Amiga had been today, hadn't Commodore gone bankrupt. It's Amiga Done Right! It has the highest performance, the best and most advanced features, the best Amiga standards integrated, the best Amiga compatibility, etc. It's the cleanest and purest Amiga NG implementation; the developers carefully follow the Amiga spirit and API literally, not figuratively, unlike "the others" who breaks Amiga compatibility and introducing alien API's and applications in an ad-hoc manner as they go by, seemingly striving towards creating a new Linux distro of it (but naturally without USB2 support, etc, since being incomplete and inferior is their signature). And you aren't forced to purchase a €1,000 dongle for it (meaning the only supported HW if you didn't get that), costing 10x-30x the money while offering by far inferior performance.
Buying "amigaos/amigaone" products only helps prolonging this irrational madness; that products "must" be ridiculously expensive, that Amiga compatibility doesn't matter, that performance isn't important, that the left-over Amiga standards (after MorphOS picked the best) are the best way to go, that being forever beta is perfectly OK. And even worse, it will only bring more of the dirty legal crap games played by their central figure Ben Hermans. All in all, the day he and his mediocre Linux Game Porting company (because that's what Hyperion is, a mediocre Linux Game Porting company) entered the Amiga scene and sent the Frieden brothers on a university crash course in OS development was indeed a very sad one. Their persistent online FUD games, community splitting efforts and apartheid websites is what brought the platform to its sad state. They use their bogus trade marks to feed weak-minded and blind brand-name followers with vastly over-priced yet inferior products of sub-standard quality and performance. And there is actually a crowd (albeit small and diminishing) cheering this, like this "drHirudo" fellow above is an example of. I however wouldn't for my life put any money whatsoever in that direction. I would feel dirty if I did.
-
That one is the leanest, fastest and most elegant Amiga option ever made, it's probably very similar to what Amiga had been today, hadn't Commodore gone bankrupt.ng by far inferior performance.
Only one comment to this sentence: No! While I really like my MorphOS 2.7 on Pegasos II - *if* Commodore would not have gone bunk and survived in it's global form, AmigaOS would/could have been far, far, far in front of both AmigaOS (current) and MorphOS.
It's a difference between a tiny handful of semi-hobby coders like we have today in all variants (AROS, MorphOS, AmigaOS) struggling for more or less a decade now or having the backup of an R&D departement of a global player (which Commodore was!). So, whatever would have come out from this theory, you can be sure it would not have looked like MorphOS. And not like current AmigaOS or AROS in this respect.
-
Actually it would have been WindowsNT (yes serious).
OS-development under C= has allways been seriously underfunded and such were the results.
When C= bought Amiga most of the basics of the OS had allready been done and C= only made sure the biggest holes were filled in the cheapest/fastes way possible (the dreaded Tripos-DOS comes to mind).
1.1 was just a quickfix to allow for PAL-Amigas, 1.2 had some serious bugs removed, and 1.3 offered little beyond autobootsupport a basic Shell and support for more than 512k chipmen.
2.x was the 1st real update and that happened 5 years after C= bought Amiga.
Or in other words, if C= had started on the same basis as MorphOS did 10 years ago they wouldn't have gotten much further ...
-
I think commodore would have been slightly ahead of the current players, but not by much.
As Kronos said, they were pretty lazy on OS updates, no RTG implementation, no 24bit printing etc.
Although by the time of their demise, I think they had just come to the realisation that it was the Amiga or nothing for them, but to late. Had they survived, perhaps they would have put more effort in.
-
This thread has become yet another demonstration of this illustrative guide (http://www.amiga.org/gallery/images/180/1_trollmatrix_final.jpg)...
not seen that before, pretty spot on
-
@cha05e90
Indeed, something most don't seem to get here is how even the most mature Amiga like OS is way behind the likes of Windows7 or SnowLeopard.
And since all of us have a second machine running one of those, going back to any Amiga flavor is done out of feel and pure love for that feel, certainly not because we realized any of the flavors delivers features and performance on par with our i7 modern gear.
Some like to support AmigaOS anticipating the day both OS and HW will somehow catch-up with modernity. Others see more potential in excellent MorphOS, yet some love to fuel the "war of the Poor" as I like to call it, with proclamations of omnipotence (in the Amiga realm) heavily disregarding the reality we live in (as in "end of January 2011, the year of SandyBridge").
So for these guys let me say it straight: if some have chosen a different flavor than yours, it's NOT because of features/price and performance (all in favor of WinTel) but because they prefer a different paradigm.
In my case I want AmigaOS on custom HW made for it, others are welcome in preferring something else.
So, keep supporting your favorite flavor, by doing this you'll make sure it will progress in the right direction, just please, stop the war of the poor, as if it were for features, price and performance there would be no-one here left to speak to, trust me on this one.
And yes, the visual guide Karlos linked (http://www.amiga.org/gallery/images/180/1_trollmatrix_final.jpg) (aptly named "The Troll Matrix"), is quite Spot on. :)
-
@cha05e90
Indeed, something most don't seem to get here is how even the most mature Amiga like OS is way behind the likes of Windows7 or SnowLeopard.
Good post, DAX.
Only thing I'd like to point out is that the "Amiga tradition" now seems to be "We are better because we are weirdly different". But when the real Amiga was on it's game the tradition was: "We are better because we smoke their asses".
-
@jorkany
I wouldn't say Amiga was only good because it smoked anything out there, sometime a good combination of factors might end up delivering a better (or rather "preferred") experience.
As a matter of fact the original Amiga never smoked other computers in terms of pure CPU power (heck on that regard even the AtariST was slightly superior) only did great at handling raster graphics, BUT more or less simultaneously with the A500 release, Sharp delivered the X68000 in Japan which as far as raster graphics went, could say a thing or two let me tell you (res up to 1024x1024, 31Khz ScreenModes, up to 65000colors and much more) lucky Commodore as they never released it outside Japan.
What I find truly unique is the Multitasking OS and the great software it inspired.
But alas those days are gone, and although we can no longer claim to be at the forefront, we can still operate a new computer the way we prefer and love, and contrary to our Japanese friends (X68000 users) we can still look forward to several "happenings" (460EX+X1000+AOS4.X, MOS and new supported HW, AROS, Natami, etc.) which is something special in its own right...
-
@jorkany
I wouldn't say Amiga was only good because it smoked anything out there, sometime a good combination of factors might end up delivering a better (or rather "preferred") experience.
As a matter of fact the original Amiga never smoked other computers in terms of pure CPU power (heck on that regard even the AtariST was slightly superior) only did great at handling raster graphics, BUT more or less simultaneously with the A500 release, Sharp delivered the X68000 in Japan which as far as raster graphics went, could say a thing or two let me tell you (res up to 1024x1024, 31Khz ScreenModes, up to 65000colors and much more) lucky Commodore as they never released it outside Japan.
What I find truly unique is the Multitasking OS and the great software it inspired.
But alas those days are gone, and although we can no longer claim to be at the forefront, we can still operate a new computer the way we prefer and love, and contrary to our Japanese friends (X68000 users) we can still look forward to several "happenings" (460EX+X1000+AOS4.X, MOS and new supported HW, AROS, Natami, etc.) which is something special in its own right...
Absolutely! We have a lot going on, and some great suff to look forward to for a system so many of our own posters keep referring to as 'dead'.
-
This thread has become yet another demonstration of this illustrative guide (http://www.amiga.org/gallery/images/180/1_trollmatrix_final.jpg)...
I suggest expanding it to a 5x5 grid.
Trust me...you'll need it.
#6
-
@jorkany
I wouldn't say Amiga was only good because it smoked anything out there, sometime a good combination of factors might end up delivering a better (or rather "preferred") experience.
As a matter of fact the original Amiga never smoked other computers in terms of pure CPU power (heck on that regard even the AtariST was slightly superior) only did great at handling raster graphics, BUT more or less simultaneously with the A500 release, Sharp delivered the X68000 in Japan which as far as raster graphics went, could say a thing or two let me tell you (res up to 1024x1024, 31Khz ScreenModes, up to 65000colors and much more) lucky Commodore as they never released it outside Japan.
What I find truly unique is the Multitasking OS and the great software it inspired.something special in its own right...
Well, tha Amiga used the CPU as a conductor, not the just as the orchestra, so it did not need quite as much grunt as CPU reliant machines. And wasn't just raster graphics that benefited from the custom chips.
I've always been interested in the x68000, but I don't expect I could have picked one up for £400 like I did with the A500, does not matter how powerfull a machine is, if I can't afford it!
-
This thread has become yet another demonstration of this illustrative guide (http://www.amiga.org/gallery/images/180/1_trollmatrix_final.jpg)...
Guess by the end of the year, that chart will see v2.0 revision? New players are coming in, they need to be included. ;)
-
Why people compare aros with morphos all time? mos and os4 at least are compatible with many classic applications just with a double click, this make a real amiga feeling (at least in morphos i never try os4).
-
@ takemehomegrandma
..I think you need a calming visit to see grandma;)
boy I feel sorry for you & Piru when the X1000 arrives..better get your blood pressure medication ready:eek:
-
This thread has become yet another demonstration of this illustrative guide (http://www.amiga.org/gallery/images/180/1_trollmatrix_final.jpg)...
Would love to see that expanded to include classic amiga users :)
-
Actually it would have been WindowsNT (yes serious).
OS-development under C= has allways been seriously underfunded and such were the results.
When C= bought Amiga most of the basics of the OS had allready been done and C= only made sure the biggest holes were filled in the cheapest/fastes way possible (the dreaded Tripos-DOS comes to mind).
1.1 was just a quickfix to allow for PAL-Amigas, 1.2 had some serious bugs removed, and 1.3 offered little beyond autobootsupport a basic Shell and support for more than 512k chipmen.
2.x was the 1st real update and that happened 5 years after C= bought Amiga.
Or in other words, if C= had started on the same basis as MorphOS did 10 years ago they wouldn't have gotten much further ...
1. Tripos under WB 1.x was superior to DOS/WIN 1 or 286/GEM MAC OS/RISC OS 1.
2. WIN NT was for when PA RISC for A5000 (A4000 successor) was a candidate CPU. Then they came to their senses and decided against it. NT was never going to replace Workbench on A1200 successors.
C= only needed to kill Medhi Ali and bury him under the foundations around 1991 to save their business though ;)
-
Would love to see that expanded to include classic amiga users :)
None of us want to spend £1500 in CPU/RAM/RTG cards for the pleasure of running them on £400 A4000s anyway though :roflmao:
-
None of us want to spend £1500 in CPU/RAM/RTG cards for the pleasure of running them on £400 A4000s anyway though :roflmao:
If it wont run on an 030 and AGA, it can bugger right off ;)
-
http://papillon.is.tokushima-u.ac.jp/hardware/ppc460ex/ benchmark from the amcc 460ex eval board running at 800 mhz. There are some "real world" video decoding benchmark for the 440ep board, that can be compared to the 460ex eval board too. http://papillon.is.tokushima-u.ac.jp/hardware/ppc440ep/
460EX @ 800 mhz http://www.linuxfordevices.com/files/misc/amcc_canyonlands.jpg http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/Embedded-PowerPC-dev-kits-come-with-Linux/
Dhrystone benchmark
-------------------
Dhrystone Benchmark, Version 2.1 (Language: C)
Program compiled with 'register' attribute
Please give the number of runs through the benchmark:
Execution starts, 333333333 runs through Dhrystone
Execution ends
Final values of the variables used in the benchmark:
Int_Glob: 5
should be: 5
Bool_Glob: 1
should be: 1
Ch_1_Glob: A
should be: A
Ch_2_Glob: B
should be: B
Arr_1_Glob[8]: 7
should be: 7
Arr_2_Glob[8][7]: 333333343
should be: Number_Of_Runs + 10
Ptr_Glob->
Ptr_Comp: 268521480
should be: (implementation-dependent)
Discr: 0
should be: 0
Enum_Comp: 2
should be: 2
Int_Comp: 17
should be: 17
Str_Comp: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, SOME STRING
should be: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, SOME STRING
Next_Ptr_Glob->
Ptr_Comp: 268521480
should be: (implementation-dependent), same as above
Discr: 0
should be: 0
Enum_Comp: 1
should be: 1
Int_Comp: 18
should be: 18
Str_Comp: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, SOME STRING
should be: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, SOME STRING
Int_1_Loc: 5
should be: 5
Int_2_Loc: 13
should be: 13
Int_3_Loc: 7
should be: 7
Enum_Loc: 1
should be: 1
Str_1_Loc: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, 1'ST STRING
should be: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, 1'ST STRING
Str_2_Loc: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, 2'ND STRING
should be: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, 2'ND STRING
User_Time = 119
Microseconds for one run through Dhrystone: 0.4
Dhrystones per Second: 2801120.5
=====================================================================
Whetstone benchmark results
Loops: 33333, Iterations: 1, Duration: 6 sec.
C Converted Double Precision Whetstones: 555.5 MIPS
=====================================================================
HINT Benchark
_ _
| | _ _ _ _____ TM
|-- | | |\ | | | |
| --| | | \ | |
| | | | \| |
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
*** The HINT PERFORMANCE ANALYZER ***
Version 1.0 June 1994
John L. Gustafson & Quinn O. Snell
Scalable Computing Laboratory
236 Wilhelm, Iowa State University
Ames, Iowa 50011-3020
(515) 294 - 9294
Copyright (C) 1994 Iowa State University Research Foundation, Inc.
Please send results and questions to: hint@scl.ameslab.gov
When sending results please follow the form in README
________________________________________________________
RECT is 36 bytes
Apparent number of bits of accuracy: 31
Maximum associative whole number: 2147483647
Maximum number of bits of index: 30
Maximum representable index: 1073741824
Index-limited data accuracy: 31 bits
Maximum usable whole number: 2147483647
Grid: 32768 wide by 65536 high.
Precision is not sufficient for > 1.0 second runs.
.
=====================================================================
Stream benchmark results
-------------------------------------------------------------
This system uses 8 bytes per DOUBLE PRECISION word.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Array size = 2000000, Offset = 0
Total memory required = 45.8 MB.
Each test is run 10 times, but only
the *best* time for each is used.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Your clock granularity/precision appears to be 1 microseconds.
Each test below will take on the order of 97490 microseconds.
(= 97490 clock ticks)
Increase the size of the arrays if this shows that
you are not getting at least 20 clock ticks per test.
-------------------------------------------------------------
WARNING -- The above is only a rough guideline.
For best results, please be sure you know the
precision of your system timer.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Function Rate (MB/s) RMS time Min time Max time
Copy: 250.6307 0.1277 0.1277 0.1280
Scale: 237.9199 0.1345 0.1345 0.1346
Add: 254.4840 0.1886 0.1886 0.1887
Triad: 254.4489 0.1887 0.1886 0.1890
=====================================================================
MPEG-4 Encode results
---------------------
Input File: ./yuv/carphone%.3d, Frames encoded: 96, Total Time: 2.350000, Avg: enctime(ms) =24479.166667, fps =40.851064, length(bytes) = 416538
Input File: ./yuv/fg%.3d, Frames encoded: 21, Total Time: 1.760000, Avg: enctime(ms) =83809.523810, fps =11.931818, length(bytes) = 121033
MPEG-4 Decode results
---------------------
Input File: ./mp4u/carphone.mp4u, Frames decoded: 93, Total Time: 0.360000, Avg: decctime(ms) =3870.967742, fps =258.333333, length(bytes) = 4310
Input File: ./mp4u/fg.mp4u, Frames decoded: 21, Total Time: 0.200000, Avg: decctime(ms) =9523.809524, fps =105.000000, length(bytes) = 5763
440EP @ 533 mhz
=====================================================================
Dhrystone benchmark
-------------------
Dhrystone Benchmark, Version 2.1 (Language: C)
Program compiled with 'register' attribute
Please give the number of runs through the benchmark:
Execution starts, 333333333 runs through Dhrystone
Execution ends
Final values of the variables used in the benchmark:
Int_Glob: 5
should be: 5
Bool_Glob: 1
should be: 1
Ch_1_Glob: A
should be: A
Ch_2_Glob: B
should be: B
Arr_1_Glob[8]: 7
should be: 7
Arr_2_Glob[8][7]: 333333343
should be: Number_Of_Runs + 10
Ptr_Glob->
Ptr_Comp: 268521552
should be: (implementation-dependent)
Discr: 0
should be: 0
Enum_Comp: 2
should be: 2
Int_Comp: 17
should be: 17
Str_Comp: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, SOME STRING
should be: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, SOME STRING
Next_Ptr_Glob->
Ptr_Comp: 268521552
should be: (implementation-dependent), same as above
Discr: 0
should be: 0
Enum_Comp: 1
should be: 1
Int_Comp: 18
should be: 18
Str_Comp: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, SOME STRING
should be: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, SOME STRING
Int_1_Loc: 5
should be: 5
Int_2_Loc: 13
should be: 13
Int_3_Loc: 7
should be: 7
Enum_Loc: 1
should be: 1
Str_1_Loc: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, 1'ST STRING
should be: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, 1'ST STRING
Str_2_Loc: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, 2'ND STRING
should be: DHRYSTONE PROGRAM, 2'ND STRING
User_Time = 177
Microseconds for one run through Dhrystone: 0.5
Dhrystones per Second: 1883239.2
=====================================================================
Whetstone benchmark results
Loops: 33333, Iterations: 1, Duration: 9 sec.
C Converted Double Precision Whetstones: 370.4 MIPS
=====================================================================
Stream benchmark results
-------------------------------------------------------------
This system uses 8 bytes per DOUBLE PRECISION word.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Array size = 2000000, Offset = 0
Total memory required = 45.8 MB.
Each test is run 10 times, but only
the *best* time for each is used.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Your clock granularity/precision appears to be 1 microseconds.
Each test below will take on the order of 112424 microseconds.
(= 112424 clock ticks)
Increase the size of the arrays if this shows that
you are not getting at least 20 clock ticks per test.
-------------------------------------------------------------
WARNING -- The above is only a rough guideline.
For best results, please be sure you know the
precision of your system timer.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Function Rate (MB/s) RMS time Min time Max time
Copy: 257.6116 0.1244 0.1242 0.1246
Scale: 253.1946 0.1265 0.1264 0.1267
Add: 254.3868 0.1888 0.1887 0.1889
Triad: 249.0738 0.1928 0.1927 0.1929
=====================================================================
MPEG-4 Encode results
Input File: ./yuv/carphone%.3d, Frames encoded: 96, Total Time: 4.160000, Avg: enctime(ms) =43333.333333, fps =23.076923, length(bytes) = 416538
Input File: ./yuv/fg%.3d, Frames encoded: 21, Total Time: 3.020000, Avg: enctime(ms) =143809.523810, fps =6.953642, length(bytes) = 121033
MPEG-4 Decode results
Input File: ./mp4u/carphone.mp4u, Frames decoded: 93, Total Time: 0.640000, Avg: decctime(ms) =6881.720430, fps =145.312500, length(bytes) = 4310
Input File: ./mp4u/fg.mp4u, Frames decoded: 21, Total Time: 0.300000, Avg: decctime(ms) =14285.714286, fps =70.000000, length(bytes) = 5763
Also worth noting from a different site: http://embedded-computing.com/amcc-powerpc-460ex-460gt-processors
Pricing and Availability
AMCCs 460EX and 460GT evaluation kits will be available in May and may be ordered from AMCC or any authorized distributor using part numbers EV-KIT-460EX-01 and EV-KIT-460GT-01. The suggested distributor resale price for each kit is $995. For more information, please contact your local AMCC sales office at http://www.amcc.com/Sales/.
AAND:
The old specs for the 460ex is to 1.2ghz, why this has changed i dont know, but if you look at that .jp site it does say 1.2.
Just for kicks im tracking down the benchmark used:
http://www.roylongbottom.org.uk/classic_benchmarks.tar.gz
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/stream/FTP/Code/
http://www.xvid.org/Downloads.43.0.html xvidcore/examples
http://trace.eas.asu.edu/yuv/carphone/carphone_qcif.7z ppffff!
Really? What are you basing this on?
The numbers I've seen are:
SAM460 AMCC460 1.167GHz
---> RAM <---
....
(source (http://www.morphzone.org/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?forum=3&topic_id=7001&start=483))
-
@ takemehomegrandma
..I think you need a calming visit to see grandma;)
boy I feel sorry for you & Piru when the X1000 arrives..better get your blood pressure medication ready:eek:
Personally, I think when (if) the X1000 goes on sale, there will be 2.7 Ghz G5 Macs slapping its over priced butt silly.
-
@ takemehomegrandma
..I think you need a calming visit to see grandma;)
boy I feel sorry for you & Piru when the X1000 arrives..better get your blood pressure medication ready:eek:
Don't worry. The x1000 won't have any real impact on the world whatsoever, except maybe as laughing stock in a similar way as if anyone would try to sell a stock 2007 specced Ford Focus at new Ferrari prices. :)
-
Personally, I think when (if) the X1000 goes on sale, there will be 2.7 Ghz G5 Macs slapping its over priced butt silly.
Not entirely impossible you know...
;)
-
The bottomline is I have actual hardware and software experience. I am employed in a technical position. I've been an IT admin and am currently a developer. I did take courses in Computer Engineering. People like you can understand simple concepts.
Fact: Quake3 will run faster on a SAM460 than on a G4 and that is directly because of video card performance. Please return to your bridge.
Not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but the hardware interface is far from the be all end all of end results. Athlon64 in its day had much higher memory performance vs ddr2 when using only ddr1. Also, quality of drivers and support within an os can make a huge difference. Using Gallium3d (the eventually to be released gfx subsystem for OS4.x) itself is one example of proof of that. There's cases where a faster gpu is slower than a better supported weaker gpu, both with nvidia and ati/amd. Any benchamrks for mos vs. os4.x while mos is using a previous generation card on a pci interface vs. os4.x using agp on a card one generation newer? Going by the huge differences in performance for 3d between the 2, Id be surprised if there wasnt situations where mos (running same software) will outdo OS4.x, even when using a theoretically much weaker gfx card.
Now I actually say this as a fan of all "amiga" options, but I couldnt help refrain from commenting after your "I know better, Im smarter" tangen, which is followed up by inaccurate comments.
Now Ive also seen you comment about G5's being restricted to ddr2-533. One detail you seem to have omitted there is that it's capable of utilizing a dual channel memory controller.
-
Any benchamrks for mos vs. os4.x while mos is using a previous generation card on a pci interface vs. os4.x using agp on a card one generation newer? Going by the huge differences in performance for 3d between the 2, Id be surprised if there wasnt situations where mos (running same software) will outdo OS4.x, even when using a theoretically much weaker gfx card.
Well, on Quake3, even a MorphOS+Efika+radeon9250 combo beats a Pegasos/Aone/whatever+OS4+radeonwhatever combo. It tells quite a lot. :)
-
Not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but the hardware interface is far from the be all end all of end results. Athlon64 in its day had much higher memory performance vs ddr2 when using only ddr1. Also, quality of drivers and support within an os can make a huge difference. Using Gallium3d (the eventually to be released gfx subsystem for OS4.x) itself is one example of proof of that. There's cases where a faster gpu is slower than a better supported weaker gpu, both with nvidia and ati/amd. Any benchamrks for mos vs. os4.x while mos is using a previous generation card on a pci interface vs. os4.x using agp on a card one generation newer? Going by the huge differences in performance for 3d between the 2, Id be surprised if there wasnt situations where mos (running same software) will outdo OS4.x, even when using a theoretically much weaker gfx card.
Here you include the software behind the hardware currently. I was hoping to ignore the OS wars and was just looking at hardware (all else being equal) because nothing is stopping an MOS port except TeamMOS.
Now I actually say this as a fan of all "amiga" options, but I couldnt help refrain from commenting after your "I know better, Im smarter" tangen, which is followed up by inaccurate comments.
Now Ive also seen you comment about G5's being restricted to ddr2-533. One detail you seem to have omitted there is that it's capable of utilizing a dual channel memory controller.
None of this matters as the '460 won't support anything faster than DDR2-400 and it currently only running at DDR2-333 speeds.
-
Why people compare aros with morphos all time?
Why not?
mos and os4 at least are compatible with many classic applications just with a double click, this make a real amiga feeling (at least in morphos i never try os4).
The same thing is currently being developed for AROS. There are 2 different approaches atm (J-UAE and Emumiga).
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by klx300r (http://www.amiga.org/forums/web/buttons/viewpost.gif) (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?p=611225#post611225)
@ takemehomegrandma
..I think you need a calming visit to see grandma;)
boy I feel sorry for you & Piru when the X1000 arrives..better get your blood pressure medication ready:eek:
Don't worry. The x1000 won't have any real impact on the world whatsoever, except maybe as laughing stock in a similar way as if anyone would try to sell a stock 2007 specced Ford Focus at new Ferrari prices. :)
hmm funny that when the X1000 was announced the major/ respected computer sources released positive reviews...heck one guy even ate his socks:) so who exactly will be laughing other than the same usual suspects here ?
I don't and won't worry because you won't see me running off to a MOS site bad mouthing anything new that's released for MOS but 'the usual suspects' make it an urgent matter to post trash on EVERY single new AmigaOS hardware or software release on Amiga sites....it's so obvious that it's laughable & sad really
-
hmm funny that when the X1000 was announced the major/ respected computer sources released positive reviews...heck one guy even ate his socks:) so who exactly will be laughing other than the same usual suspects here ?
Some news outlets bought into the release story. Remember the "cold fusion" guys from back in the 90s? Now it's a year later the media "explosion" doesn't even have an echo.
I don't and won't worry because you won't see me running off to a MOS site bad mouthing anything new that's released for MOS but 'the usual suspects' make it an urgent matter to post trash on EVERY single new AmigaOS hardware or software release on Amiga sites....it's so obvious that it's laughable & sad really
Difference is, MOS isn't trying to be something it isn't (Amiga). I suspect when Hyperion & Co. stop misappropriating the Amiga name they will stop being the target of so much criticism as well.
-
hmm funny that when the X1000 was announced the major/ respected computer sources released positive reviews
Ah yes, announcement reviews.... gotta love those.
-
Why not?
The same thing is currently being developed for AROS. There are 2 different approaches atm (J-UAE and Emumiga).
Apples and orranges. They are for hardware banging games and apps I believe. MorphOS changes 68k to PPC code on the fly and I beleive. MorphsOS is 3.1 binary comptaible for asystem frienddly, not the same as running an emulator.
-
Apples and orranges. They are for hardware banging games and apps I believe.
Quite true for J-UAE, not quite true for Emumiga: http://emumiga.com/about
MorphOS changes 68k to PPC code on the fly and I beleive. MorphsOS is 3.1 binary comptaible for asystem frienddly, not the same as running an emulator.
For the end user experience, this doesn't matter.
-
I stand corrected on the Emumiga front. However I think it does make a difference to the end users as converting to ppc code and using the system api gives a) much more integration b) is much much much faster
-
Difference is, MOS isn't trying to be something it isn't (Amiga). I suspect when Hyperion & Co. stop misappropriating the Amiga name they will stop being the target of so much criticism as well.
Dear Jorkany. On behalf of anyone wanting to see the Amiga move forward since 1993, id like to declare your comment as trolling, as the head chief of trolling on the internet has already approved you to the position as troll of the camp, i would hereby like to offer my support for this ruling.
Now to get to the bottom of "misappropriating" which by whereby ye me(n)th, actually means bringing the original Amigaos incarnation to new highs, we, the trolling association of amiga vaporware will have to disregard with this ruling previously reached, and label you only as a freak of computing, or scum of the earth. However, if you wold not like the Original evolution of the OS to succeed press #2. Would you however like, to see, any professional effort on behalf of the platform to bring the OS up to speed, press, #1. If you do not at all appreciate this effort, it being years behind the "competition" press #hangup. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXx-n6T7tZg
Seriously, if you fail to understand or see that the Amigaos in any incarnation is actually quickly becoming something the vast majority of computer users out there would desire, due to its light weight and good use of hw , ( be it that in this dream mode they would all have to "unite" AND conquer ). Truly, atleast the Morphos camp deserves loads of credit for beating Apple on its own platform, and we see OS4 yeeears behind already preforming good on the same HW. Which only goes to show what the competence left in the scene is able to do with the little resources they have.
-
I stand corrected on the Emumiga front. However I think it does make a difference to the end users as converting to ppc code and using the system api gives a) much more integration b) is much much much faster
I think both solutions have their advantages & disadvantages. In my experience, the greatest disadvantage of the MorphOS/Trance approach is that many old Amiga applications simply aren't "system friendly enough" to work properly/work at all.
But we're getting quite off topic...
-
I think both solutions have their advantages & disadvantages. In my experience, the greatest disadvantage of the MorphOS/Trance approach is that many old Amiga applications simply aren't "system friendly enough" to work properly/work at all.
But we're getting quite off topic...
Personally, I'm willing to live with that 'disadvantage'.
Old applications are not a major attraction to me. Being OS and processor compatible is useful to me.
If I was that focused on register level compatibility I'd be using a legacy system
-
try this one K&N 69-8610TTK (http://www.fasterthanthem.com/10447.html)
-
try this one K&N 69-8610TTK (http://www.fasterthanthem.com/10447.html)
Uh... Yeah.