Amiga.org
Operating System Specific Discussions => Amiga OS => Amiga OS -- Development => Topic started by: delshay on January 31, 2005, 10:23:17 PM
-
will 2M broadband be to much for the A12OO pcmcia slot..
£19.99 2GB limit at www.plusnet..
-
no it should work.. with my A1200/030 I always got at least 300KB/s(local ftp transfer) with a cnet.device pcmcia card..
-
No 2Mbit will be fine- we have an A1200T here connected to a 2Mb PlusNet (force9) connection.
-
It will be fine indeed as I have it too here. Allthough 2 mbit is rather the max for a 060/50 cpu. I have a choice here for 2 or 8 mbit, but i notice that when using full bw and having a 1 mbit upload there's not really a lot more to do with the cpu (when for instance dl a torrent, streaming, browsing a bit, etc.). And that is via ethernet on the mediator, I'm told the pcmcia is even more cpu hungry.
-
It'll max out around 3 Mbit IIRC. I never managed to get more than 10 kbs/sec on my A600, but that was with a 68000 CPU! :-D
-
And only the process of copying data I presume ;-)
-
@Gerbinist:
The A1200 with 060 and a PCMCIA-network card can actually shove data over the network pretty fast. These are the results from my A1200:
Hardware:
A1200
Blizzard1260 060@50MHz
CNet CN40BC network card
Software:
AmiTCP 4.3
cnet.device 1.8b
Kickstart 3.1
Workbench 3.1
Non-default settings:
Kickstart in FastRAM
exec.library in FastRAM
Amiga -> PC (TCP):
ttcp-t: buflen=8192, nbuf=2048, align=16384/0, port=5001 tcp ->
ttcp-t: socket
ttcp-t: connect
ttcp-t: 16777216 bytes in 24.28 real seconds = 674.89 KB/sec +++
ttcp-t: 2048 I/O calls, msec/call = 12.14, calls/sec = 84.36
ttcp-t: 0:24real
Amiga -> PC (UDP):
ttcp-t: buflen=8192, nbuf=2048, align=16384/0, port=5001 udp ->
ttcp-t: socket
ttcp-t: 16777216 bytes in 27.36 real seconds = 598.79 KB/sec +++
ttcp-t: 2737 I/O calls, msec/call = 10.24, calls/sec = 100.03
ttcp-t: 0:27real
PC -> Amiga (TCP):
ttcp-r: buflen=8192, nbuf=2048, align=16384/0, port=5001 tcp
ttcp-r: socket
ttcp-r: accept from 192.168.0.1
ttcp-r: 16777216 bytes in 17.08 real seconds = 959.36 KB/sec +++
ttcp-r: 5818 I/O calls, msec/call = 3.01, calls/sec = 340.67
ttcp-r: 0:17real
Some general tips to get good performance in order of importance are:
- Use the AmiTCP/Genesis TCP/IP stack
- Relocate exec.library to fastmem
- Relocate the kickstart to fastmem
/Patrik
-
@Patrik
I understand completely what you are saying, but I was refering to also actually *use* the data that comes in.
Cool testing figures though, but those figures only resemble one process and that is: "shoving data".
In my case, the data that comes in with 2mbit download also gets used by for instance torrent, streaming, browsing etc. and that's where the cpu limit comes in.
So when I stated that 2mbit is rather the max, I was refering to actually using that data too ;-)
-
@ Gerbinist
I don't remember. I think I was FTP-ing some files from another computer.
-
@Gerbinist:
Ofcourse, if you use the incoming data in a very cpu intensive way, you will have a rather low max. Say if you would be streaming a mpeg4 stream, you would not need many tens of kilobytes of data per second before the 68060 would be saturated performance wise. Though, if you intend to use your Amiga for something that is more intensive network wise rather than cpu wise, these figures represent a rough upper level a well written and effective application can achieve.
/Patrik
-
@Patrik
You're right.
Where do you think the bottlenecks are? Would SCSI for instance bring up the numbers even more? Or are your testresults from RAM:?
-
@Gerbinist:
Ttcp is just a tool to measure the raw TCP/UDP performance you can achieve between two systems. The numbers you get represent how fast data can be transferred between your computers memory and another computers memory using either TCP or UDP packets. In say a simple application that downloads files to your harddrive using the HTTP protocol - a HTTPGet application, the application will also have to deal with the HTTP protocol plus write the data to a file on your harddrive.
The above example with a HTTPGet application would benefit from SCSI as it usually has a higher transfer rate plus often uses DMA so there is more processing power left for the TCP/IP stack and the application itself.
For networking performance in general on the Amiga, the TCP/IP stacks are a very big bottleneck. Neither AmiTCP/Genesis or Miami are very effective to say the least. Though AmiTCP/Genesis is much faster than Miami.
Especially if you have a fast connection - slow, non DMA harddrive controllers (A1200/A4000/A600 stock IDE for example) imposes a big bottleneck as just writing the file to disk will require a huge chunk of the available cpu time.
/Patrik
-
obviously yes.
The great CPU eating, is IDE (internal ot FastATA) related.
Here in Italy, we have done tests on a fiber channel connection on a 040@25 Mhz with FastATA and the bottleneck was 040CPU-FastAta related (100% CPU used during download>write to disk).
With a 060 and SCSI, i don't think it would be a problem.
-
lets cut a long story short..
i have here **possible** the fastest a1200PPC **desktop** know to man...
now all i want to know is with my system & os3.9 ( bb1 only ) what is the max the PCMCIA will handel..
some posted around 900kbs, but if the OS was PPC the PCMCIA speed will also go up? correct me if im wrong..
-
delshay wrote:
some posted around 900kbs, but if the OS was PPC the PCMCIA speed will also go up? correct me if im wrong..
The max throughput of the PCMCIA port is limited by the A1200 motherboard, using PPC software could help remove some of the bottlenecks in reaching that speed though.
-
@doobrey
so there is some sort of speed-up..
if this is the case then any PPC OS on classic amigas with PHASE 5 board will also let-off more heat..( ie no 68k, PPC chip works at full speed [[[ more power more heat ]]] correct me if im wrong...
-
delshay wrote:
so there is some sort of speed-up..
I wouldn`t say "is", more "maybe", it all depends what you`re offloading to the PPC.
As for using a "PPC only" OS, I`ve got no idea, I`ve never had a PPC`d Amiga to play with, dunno if the dreaded context switching would hurt PCMCIA access or not, or is it short enough to not worry about?
-
Hi. I've looked for a SCSI network card once but couldn't find one. Does anyone know if a SCSI network cards exist? That would use DMA with low CPU overhead and have higher throughputs..
-
A long time ago, in Amiga past a company called C Ltd released a series of scsi controllers and a driver that allowed networking over the A500/2000/A1000 C Ltd.
I am not sure what the status of these things are currently (if the drivers would even work with the current version of AmigaDOS). However back in the early 90s (before the A3000) we actually had one of these systems working in the computer store I worked in.
-
@JOSE
SCSI NETWORK? i did not think it was possible..
well i tell you what iv got connected to my scsi chain maybe it possible with my unit..
its a PCMCIA type I-III controler connect to my SCSI chain..it has it own local MOTOROLA processor & CONTROLER on board..
according to the manual if i insert any type of flash card if it does not like it, it will try & do its own formatting...
you can also upgrade the rom chip..( i think flashable as well )..
i can insert any 16bit cards & the unit can see it...
this unit is very expensive just over £300.00