debian hardinfo benchmarks

[Kesa]

What is the purpose of this thread? This is just a blue camp troll thread telling us why MOS is superior to OS4.x.

If you don't like the x1000 don't buy it, otherwise stop trolling.

[Kesa]

As far as I can see it is just a similar thread to this one: http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=35671

But I guess that thread is just a troll thread telling us why x86 PC is superior to OS4 systems? I bet the SAM and X1000 owners posting their results really wanted to hurt and upset people by showing simple hardware facts about their systems. Right?

Your link is a bit too vague so maybe you could be more specific?

Anyway you must be daft if you really think Piru isn't using those silly graphs without having an agenda. He did it before when it first came out and now he is doing it again. In fact this is almost free advertising in favour of MOS and you and i both know who develops MOS.

You guys can use all the polls you like to try and prove that the x1000 is inferior and overpriced but it doesn't change anything. If i could afford it i would happily hand over the money for the obviously (according to Piru) outdated/overpriced x1000 if it means i don't have to use my $150 G4 Apple MacMini piece of **** anymore.

BTW, now i have your attention what is going on with the NatAmi? I'm getting worried...  

[Kesa]

Sorry i meant graphs not polls.

[Kesa]

"he" (piru) only made the PowerBook tests and the PowerBook only has one core to use, even when running linux.

The other systems results were made by OS4 users, with their linux and their hardware.

The test is not about MorphOS or AmigaOS. It is just about comparing "outdated" with "up to date" hardware.

In the result the X1000 gets nearly beaten by a ten times cheaper hardware, which most people dumped years ago.

It seems it is easier to call the presentation of facts trolling, just because one does not like the results.

 Geit

Nah, they are just using the graphs as ammo in promoting Morphos by discrediting the x1000.

[Kesa]

@Forcie



Never mind Kesa. Sometimes it's difficult to know whether he's "trolling or just stupid" but obviously he's kind of confused here. :lol:

- Doing benchmarks isn't something bad.
- Posting benchmarks online isn't something bad.
- Discussing these benchmarks isn't something bad either.

Of course not!

Trying to inflict some kind of selective taboo on civil discussions and measurable, enlightening test data (like Kesa just did above) is bad, however. And so is trying to sell a product by trying to hide information about its performance. Where were Kesa with his lectures about "agenda's" when some people threw stones at the MorphOS team for going the Mac route, mocking MorphOS's lack of "new" hardware? Well, it turned out that this "crappy old Mac HW" is just as good -or indeed even better- than the big Messiah computer those people put forward as the right way to go (at 1/20 of the cost), and *then* Kesa gets all upset! Which is kind of funny, since the whole benchmark initiative, as well as all the numbers (except the PowerMac), comes from the OS4 community, by *their* initiative! "Agenda?" :lol:

* Past MorphOS HW (Pegasos1/April, Pegasos2) was always better than OS4 HW (AmigaOne), and much cheaper.

* Current MorphOS HW (a whole flora of mainstream Mac machines in various shapes and forms) is better than current OS4 HW (Sam and A1X1K), and much cheaper.

* Future MorphOS HW (x86 or ARM, that's the question, maybe both?) will definitely be better than anything the OS4 people can put forward in batches of 30 units based on PPC, and much cheaper.

Once again, it turned out that the MorphOS team had the winning strategy. While still being tied to the PPC platform, they looked around themselves and noticed how the market was full of cheap mainstream HW that were more powerful than anything else on the PPC market, and they said to themselves: "Why don't we use that?", and so they did! The A1X1K is a horror-example of what you get when going in the opposite direction. But the thing is, so was the Sam460. And so was the Sam440 before that. Time and time again, it becomes evident that some people never learn! And no wonder, when all they seem wanting to do, is to put their head in the sand and forbid any kind of discussions on these subjects, and then push ahead with one crazy project after another! This is killing the OS4 platform (not that I really care, IMHO the OS4 project was completely redundant from Day 1, and the Amiga community would have been much better off without it)...

Where have you been lately? I sorta noticed you made a convienient comeback when there is an opportunity for a MOS spam fest :razz:

Anyway, my problem isn't the benchmarks. Numbers don't lie after all. My problem is the motive behind them.

I don't think the people who bought X1000's were concerned too much about benchmarks. That's why I dismiss them as I don't think they are relevant. So why is Piru so interested? He did them  just so he can say "the X1000 is overpriced crap and here is the proof".

[Kesa]

Exactly. That's why i don't bother with benchmarks. Benchmarks are like thinktanks. Thinktanks are usually used when certain parties have an agenda and then use stats to prove it. Piru is just sugar coating the numbers in the benchmark to belittle the X1000 for the purpose of promoting Morphos. Sure, numbers don't lie - but people do.

[Kesa]

Again, why do you keep using A1X1K? :confused:

Amiga 10 1000. It doesn't even make sense! :confused: