Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Hardware Issues and discussion => Topic started by: roger_ramjet on May 11, 2003, 05:07:41 PM
-
just a quick question for u amigans out there.
I was just wondering if anybody knows why PPC was the chosen platform for the new amigas? i love all cpus they all have there own advantages and disadvantages but i just dont understand why PPC was chosen . Dont flame me but i would have thought that X86 would have been a better performance/value choice . Eg If X86 was chosen the upcoming athlon64(Hammers) would be used ... 64 bit amiga !? .. X86 is also more available , better price/performance and would allow better market penetration ... Try and explain what a PPC CPU is to someone who doesnt understand computers . Also wouldnt an X86 path allow for improved hardware eg PCI-EXPRESS and so on and so-forth. Anyway PPC is the choice and i really hope it succeeds but im just curious ? thanx :-?
-
Not this one again :-)
IMO PPC was chosen because:
* Amiga already uses it
* There are lots of Amiga PPC apps
* It's too easy to get pushed out by windoze on x86
* More custom hardware helps stop piracy
Of course there are other reasons like less heat produced, but those are some of the major ones. Try searching the forums for past threads on this (there are loads :-D)
64 bit doesn't come into it - the PPC970 will be 64 bit, but AOS won't be for a while. And the market is tiny at the moment - anyone who wants to buy one now probably knows what PPC is. That could change later.
Also, remember that both Genesi and A inc chose PPC - they cannot both be wrong... can they?
-
@alx,
Agreed.
From a geeky point of view, I prefer PPC and so I'm quite sanguine over the choice.
However, I must admit x86 could have been very interesting.
For the majority of windows users, it hardly seems to matter what stratospheric heights their MHz ratings reach...a 'must have' windows upgrade soon comes along that pulls the system performance back down back where they were before they upgraded their CPU :-)
Few OS kernels come close to the efficiency of exec, a native implementation running on some overclocked AMD would be quite something.
But the same is true for PPC and I for one am looking forward to seeing OS4 strut it's stuff on a decent PPC system :-D
-
I like the idea of using a CPU that doesn't require a heatsink that weighs more than every other component in the system put together :-)
-
and noisy fans really get on my tits when playing
music or video allthough new fans are getting
quieter
-
My PC noise problems should all be over when I upgrade to the AthlonXP 2400+ (2GHz), nice new core CPU that *actually* runs cooler, so nice low speed fan in there too :-)
Damn Palomino core AthlonXP... evil.
-
alx wrote:
* More custom hardware helps stop piracy
Oh yeah, not that again .....
The limitation to custom will stop piracy of OS4.00000 in
the A1-version, it will have no effect on OS4.0 for CSPPC,
OS4.1,4.2 .... and absolutly no effect for 3rd party SW.
-
by alx on 2003/5/11 12:18:46
* Amiga already uses it
* There are lots of Amiga PPC apps
Alot? How many is that? I thought there were mighty few applications expressly writen for PowerUp (that uses nothing on the 68K and custom chipset side).
* It's too easy to get pushed out by windoze on x86
The vast majority of folks already own x86 (and probably 99% of them with Windows). So if they already have x86, why would windows push OS4 out of the market? The only reason to buy a A1 (or peg for that matter) is for the fun of using that given OS. If you think it's a either or situation of OS4 vs Windows, I think your sadly out of the mainstream of thought. Even I have a drive with M$ on it because I like to play Dark Ages of Camelot. Everything else in the house is Linux.
* More custom hardware helps stop piracy
Funny, Amigas had custom hardware (which I will dispute that A1 has at all) and that didn't do squat against piracy.
Dammy
-
Alot? How many is that? I thought there were mighty few applications expressly writen for PowerUp (that uses nothing on the 68K and custom chipset side).
OK, exaggeration on my part. But seeing as Amiga is already drifting that way, PPC makes sense as long as it is still viable (which it is). And people like backwards compatibility (to a point). Wasn't there a thread here a while ago about someone managing to get one of Hyperion's PPC titles going on MorphOS?
* It's too easy to get pushed out by windoze on x86
If people can run an OS with many games alongside OS4, then there would be little incentive for people to develop games for OS4. OS4 might not be mainstream now - but we have to aspire to mainstreamdom.
Funny, Amigas had custom hardware (which I will dispute that A1 has at all) and that didn't do squat against piracy.
I was refering to piracy of the OS - there's no point in pirating it if it can only work on an A1 which is sold with OS4.
-
I was refering to piracy of the OS - there's no point in pirating it if it can only work on an A1 which is sold with OS4.
NOTHING is un-crackable, I repeat, NOTHING.
Anyone remeber Robocop 3 and it's "Uncrackable" dongle protection? Most people had the fairlight crack before it even got into the shops.
What makes you think AmigaOS4's protection is any different?
-
I agree the argument that useing X86 would cause amiga to lose to windows is just total bullsh*t ... Amiga lost to windows ages ago... it can however keep on par with the CPU's if it uses X86... PPC is alright because of the upcomming PPC970... but X86's price/performance ratio is sweet and the argument about 'if we go X86 we'll lose to windows' is just BS...
@mdma
right on...thats what I'm saying... useing a lame excuse like 'so we wont get pirates' is so transperant... no dongle has EVER been effective...and it WONT ever be effective... besides in a community this small the piracy element is TINY if existant at all... its not even proven to be a big element...
-
the argument about 'if we go X86 we'll lose to windows' is just BS...
PPC is just an emotional thing, more than anything else. x86=PC in the minds of Amigans and always will do.
-
no dongle has EVER been effective...and it WONT ever be effective...
Two words.......... Cubase........ Radium.............. ;-)
-
I'm somewhat surprised that no one mentioned the Endian thing - and the pain in the bum generated when trying to convert from one scheme (the m68k series of processors) to another (Intel).
The PPC series was always intended by its designers to be a successor for the 680x0's, and was designed to be (relatively) easy to change over to.
Not to mention that it is a better processor. In my opinion. (heat, registers, RISC, fresh design not pretending to be a CPU from 1976... ;-) )
PPC was reinforced as the Amigaone CPU as a) there is already Amiga S/W that caters (at least a little) for PPC, and the OS4 developers didnt want to have to arse around with Endian shenanigans as well as having to remove Custom Chips dependencies.
If you doubt, I'm sure Rogue and/or EntilZha will confirm ( Hi guys ! howz it goin ! :-D )
-
Funny, I don't see AROS crew complaining about the Endian issue.
Dammy
-
NOTHING is uncrackable?
How about TCPA !!
And why would anyone bother cracking OS4 when its such a minuscule market (ATM) ?
-
And why would anyone bother cracking OS4 when its such a minuscule market (ATM) ?
So they can run it on a Pegasos or a Mac maybe? :-D
As for TCPA, yes, it's crackable, it'll just take forever and a day! ;-)
-
dammy wrote:
Funny, I don't see AROS crew complaining about the Endian issue.
AROS isn't backward compatible with 68k Amiga software.
A better comparison would be Amithlon: on the one hand, afaik it is something that creates difficulties for it, although otoh, it shows that it is possible to get around them.
-
AROS isn't backward compatible with 68k Amiga software
If I remember rightly, if AROS is running native on a 68k CPU, then it will run system friendly 68k Amiga software.
-
Let me put some personal perspective on this.
I run my Amiga software now with a PPC G3 at 600MHz. Yes, it's a Pegasos. The whole setup cost me less than a modern middle-end PC - including custom tower and cordless keyboard and mouse. It isn't slow, not by any stretch of the imagination.
It takes 10 seconds to boot. IBrowse loads in a flash - literally. I can go from being powered off to browsing Amiga.org in less than 13 seconds. Absolutely everything I run on it flies - and that's without JIT. It is literally quieter than a whisper: the only fan is in the PSU. My AGP 3D card is fast even by modern standards and also needs no fan.
I have a UDMA hard drive that can load 38MB/s, 512MB of very fast RAM, and 64MB of DDR graphics RAM. I get 16bit 48KHz sound with no noticable performance hit. Needless to say this is total overkill: no Amiga apps in existence need anywhere near this spec. It eats Heretic 2 alive in framerate - and that's just in software mode. I can view PDF files faster than a 2GHz PC can. Every app I click on is loaded almost the moment I let go of the mouse button. It is truly the fastest feeling machine I have ever used, and I've used a lot.
AmigaONE owners need not feel left out. The A1XE spec is even faster, once they get a real OS to run, and not just Linux (which makes everything feel slow).
And best of all, I get to know that I have something different, something that's not just another bog-standard PC. And I love it.
Who the hell needs x86?
-
I run my Amiga software now with a PPC G3 at 600MHz. Yes, it's a Pegasos. The whole setup cost me less than a modern middle-end PC -
“Define middle end PC”...
A $299 USD (~$550 AUD) Pegy package** (via Phoenix membership (I recall)) would easily get you an Athlon XP 2600+ and Leadtek nForce 2.
The same $299 USD (~$550 AUD) would easily get you an Intel Pentium 4@ 2.4Ghz (~$350 AUD) and ASUS P4S333-C DDR (~$145 AUD). Intel is not the only CPU and chipset vendor in the X86 market.
Cheaper prices (while roughly holding performance levels) can be obtained via the use of SIS based chipsets and AMD processors.
**Assuming it's just a motherboard and CPU package.
When given similar keyboard, mouse, ATX case, FDD, HDD, CD-R(W)/DVD-R(W), Video card and sound card; they should be similar for both platforms.
Who the hell needs x86?
Playing 2003 era leisure titles…
-
It takes 10 seconds to boot. IBrowse loads in a flash - literally. I can go from being powered off to browsing Amiga.org in less than 13 seconds
One could do same thing on Windows 3.11** and Opera on Pentium 4 2.0Ghz (PC2100 DDR SDRAM/7200RPM HD) box.
**Windows 98 Lite (minus IE shell and useless other things) could be use.
-
dont forget the backwards compatability with big-endian based data structures
all the old amigaos software had to access structures direct, in big-endian format, so this would need to be byte swapped in any emulation - WAAaaaaaaaaay too messy
i wouldnt like amigaos to be on the x86
it wouldnt make it any more popular anyway
-
Funny, it wasn't too messy for Amithlon. If and when someone adds in seamless emulation into AROS, I think you would be greatly suprised on how fast it still can be for the end user. Although I'm not too sure why plain old UAE isn't good enough to begin with for any OS.
Dammy
-
dammy wrote:
Funny, it wasn't too messy for Amithlon. If and when someone adds in seamless emulation into AROS, I think you would be greatly suprised on how fast it still can be for the end user. Although I'm not too sure why plain old UAE isn't good enough to begin with for any OS.
Dammy
you forget about the fact that 68k apps and ppc apps are ment to run together like on older ppc powered amigas
users want some of the same apps
-
dammy wrote:
Funny, it wasn't too messy for Amithlon.
Some people may not like the saga that surrounds Amithlon…
If and when someone adds in seamless emulation into AROS, I think you would be greatly suprised on how fast it still can be for the end user.
That would be nice...
Although I'm not too sure why plain old UAE isn't good enough to begin with for any OS.
It’s not a stand-alone solution.
-
"Define middle end PC"...
A middle-end PC: about the spec you'd get for 1000 UKP. My (over-extravagant) Pegasos setup cost me £700, all in (minus monitor). Any PC beneath the 1000UKP mark is pretty much useless: it's obsolete far too fast. You'd be lucky to play the new games at the time, never mind in six months. Old PCs are useful for Linux and for office stuff, not for games. I've been through this twice before and have two PCs that will either not work at all with modern games or will struggle badly. I have to daily watch XP utterly crawl on a 1.3GHz Athlon with a "measly" 128MB.
Quote:
Who the hell needs x86?
Playing 2003 era leisure titles.
Of which there are none on the Amiga, and not just because its hardware is too old. If one wants to play PC games, one should get a PC and run Windows on it - and should shut up and just put up with whatever sh*t Windows throws at one with clenched teeth. (*shudder*)
-
It takes 10 seconds to boot. IBrowse loads in a flash - literally. I can go from being powered off to browsing Amiga.org in less than 13 seconds
One could do same thing on Windows 3.11** and Opera on Pentium 4 2.0Ghz (PC2100 DDR SDRAM/7200RPM HD) box.
Sounds masochistic. :-o I've seen Windows3.11 chew up busmaster DMA as if it was PIO0. Windows for Workgroups was horribly bloated at the time, far more bloated than MorphOS is now, even without taking the year into account. In short, I think 10 seconds is wildly optimistic.
-
a good PC in america can be gotten for far below 1000USD let alone UKP ... for example one of my systems..
P4 2.4/533FSB
1.5GB DDR
2x 80GB IBM drives
drive sleds/caddys
CDRW 32X
Asus motherboard
GeForce4 Ti4400
I could build it now for less then 1000 easily...and it'll play most all modern games just fine and its a very good system.... I cant see how I'd be able to build any PPC based system of comparable specs to that for that price...not that I'm as against PPC as I was at one time... but there is no need to gloss it over... PPC's price/performance ratio isnt there... not at all... I'm hoping PPC970 changes this...
something like Pegasos I think derives its value in the future from the fact that it can do alot with little...not a little with alot... a PPC970 might be a waste putting into a Peggy right now anyway...since the OS will fly on a G3 600mhz... I think thats where its value comes in... bieng able to use a relatively cheap processor (or cheap someday?!?!?) and do alot... I think peggy might make a nice game console or something someday because of this..
-
@KennyR:
Of course, if AmigaOS (or even Morphos) would be ported to a 2GHz x86 successfully, that would be even faster. But I think the point you're trying to get across is that your 600MHz G3 is fast _enough_, which rarely happens on my 2.2GHz P4 (Debian). For some odd reason it doesn't happen on my 666MHz G3 (Debian) either, but that's Linux for you, yes. X is a bad beast...
-
good PC in america can be gotten for far below 1000USD let alone UKP ... for example one of my systems..
P4 2.4/533FSB
1.5GB DDR
2x 80GB IBM drives
drive sleds/caddys
CDRW 32X
Asus motherboard
GeForce4 Ti4400
Middle end. (Looks like a teeny gamer's setup, actually.)
Besides, a x86 native AmigaOS could never be coded to work on the range of PC hardware people would want (ie. a new setup every six months), so why even both to mention it?
I think peggy might make a nice game console or something someday because of this..
Hold that thought. Genesi make their money from custom hardware. In other words, standard hardware = no money. No money = no development. No development = no OS. If you're waiting for a x86 Pegasos, I advise you to prepare for a VERY long haul.
-
see your assumeing an AmigaOS for X86 would need to run on everything...if it ran on 1 setup and they told us what to buy...and it was obselete it would still be cheaper and more attainable :) ...I said this to rouge... he said 'how would we support it' and mentioned the same chipset combo he's been mentioning for 2 years now...the ali magic and radeon classic I believe... I think this argument dosent hold water as the motherboard is only 1 thing that can cause problems like that... suppport will be the same no matter what... and if they did go X86 they could just release compatability sheets to tell people what to buy and what not to.
and my P4 2.4 was bought all new... Quadro 4 750 due back from PNY anytime now : ) no gamer system... I dont even have Quake...
-
see your assumeing an AmigaOS for X86 would need to run on everything...if it ran on 1 setup and they told us what to buy...and it was obselete it would still be cheaper and more attainable :)
Erm, no.
If they told you what to buy, it would limit people in the same way as PPC hardware does, negating the whole advantage of using cheaper PC stuff. So what's the point? And as for availability - forget it. Try getting old PC hardware on a reliable basis and you'll see what I mean. And, supporting a chipset doesn't mean supporting more cards in the same family, as you'd soon find out.
and my P4 2.4 was bought all new... Quadro 4 750 due back from PNY anytime now : ) no gamer system... I dont even have Quake...
Then you wasted your money, my friend. Unless you needed a heater, that is.
-
I won't forget my friend of mine, who from the beginning preferred Linux over MOS (before getting his Peg), and now refraining "Why is it so damn slow?" when he boots into Linux instead of MOS. I've heard from him "Voyager is the fastest browser on earth" and the like, when he tried MOS. Again, it's nothing objective, just the result of the shock having an AmigaOS like operating system on a decent hardware. The same will go for OS4 I presume.
Except stability AmigaOS is a killer. Stability is the issue both OS4 and MOS will have to face, and they address differently.
I know, I know, a decent browser provides more than current Amiga browsers, just as Linux provides more services than either OS I mentioned above but I hope you get what I mean. :-)
-
I wasted number 3000 nooooooo ... I forgot ...
-
@KennyR
You own a Pegasos? i thought you was a Amigaone and OS4 only guy.
Amazing.
-
@ KennyR
I installed Win311 on my system between OS reinstalls for laughs, and Win311 took ~6 seconds to finish loading from the moment I hit enter on win.com.
But anyway, Win95 is a PITA to get into shape to have an Internet connection and not get blown off the net within minutes, Win311 even more so.
-
I wasted number 3000 nooooooo ... I forgot ...
:oops:
-
I installed Win311 on my system between OS reinstalls for laughs, and Win311 took ~6 seconds to finish loading from the moment I hit enter on win.com.
Did I mention that about 6 seconds of the MOS boot is actually the initialisation of Open Firmware? MOS only takes about 4 seconds to boot. Seems it still beats Windows3.11. ;-)
-
I think you will find it is because phase 5 had already made ppc acelerators for older 68k based amigas, and it was a easier to use ppc than an x86 chips, i think ppc has some sort of compatability with 68k and it also runs very cool meaning it would be better for imformation devices where there is not much room or airflow.x86 would need a lot of work and i reckon it would cost a lot more to get a board desighn. ? :-)
-
ok i started this thread to see what people would have to say so i could get a better idea of why ppc was chosen, however i made a mistake in my question. Most people are concentrating on the actual CPU , i meant why was the ppc PLATFORM chosen. Yes i have read with interest all of the above messages but can i please clarify . I believe that X86 would have been better again for price/performance ratio , peripheral support. Something this ppc platform misses out on are features such as dual channel ddr ram controllers , integrated ram controllers ( future Athlon 64) , better ...
-
support for SMP , pci-express , higher FSB and so on and so forth . That is just the hardware . There is also much more availability of code and code optimizations ( SSE ,SSE2 , 3DNow etc) for programmers to jump straight over and utilize these with amigaos. The amiga would not necessarily turn into another *nix or doze platform cos we could learn from there bloated mistakes. We could also learn to integrate succesfull ideas like WineX on linux so amigans could have the latest games without having the rest of the other two bloated os's tagging below.
-
Win311 took ~6 seconds to finish loading from the moment I hit enter on win.com.
And just how long did it take to get through the POST test and the rest of the BIOS chuff that goes on, and then to boot DOS 6 up and all it's memory drivers and so forth? I'd guess another 30 seconds at least.
-
@rodger_ramjet
Ok, thanks for the clarification!
PowerPC was chosen for a few reasons:
1) Availibility of 68k to PowerPC porting tools (originally for Mac,
but easily adapted for the Amiga)
2) Bus design is similar, allowing for PowerPC accelerator cards for
legacy machines (again, the reason for this was due to the Macintosh,
to allow Apple to make new machines quicker)
3) Familiarity of coders with the work needed to port 68k to PowerPC.
(yet another thing inherited from Apple's identical move)
4) Ease of creating emulators to execute 68k code on the PowerPC
(bingo, Apple again)
So, in short, the decision was made because Apple did it, which paved
the way to simplify the work for the Amiga. The tools, design
knowledge needed, etc were all created for the Macintosh transition,
which then Amiga could take advantage of for low-cost. To port the
system to x86, even a limited setup, would have required a whole new
batch of tools and training developers from scratch. Cost much more
in the short turn with the same chance of failure with either route.
Some people can proclaim cost savings with x86, but that's only with 1
component, the motherboard. Otherwise, these systems are the same,
same video cards, same networking cards, same hard drives, etc.
So you're not gaining much from this x86 plan, but instead gaining
huge debts in the development cycle while reducing your ability to
make money in the longer term...
No thank you, I think PPC is the way to go.
-
KennyR wrote:
Every app I click on is loaded almost the moment I let go of the mouse button.
Heh, here too, as long as I hold the mouse button for a short while :-)
Sorry, unconstructive, but could not resist :)
Sincerely,
-Kenneth Straarup.
PS: It sounds very cool, but I thought MOS had JIT? If it is not needed, then who cares, but I just thought I had heard that somewhere.
-
@elendil
The MOS-JIT (Trance) is only available for Betatester_1-owners,
us mortal BT2s have to live with the static for the time being.
This ain't a prob as long as you use apps that call a lot into
the OS (like an editor), or are (partly) native (PuP/WOS/MOS).
It can onlybe felt if you run something that does lot of
calculating in 68k,
-
@ mdma
Including BIOS post will bring extremely erratic results across the board. Some PCs get past BIOS POST so quickly that the monitor won't have had time to warm up, while others wait ages. That's entirely down to what the manufacturer prefers.
I'm not trying to compare AmigaOS and Windows boot times, I know it's a futile exercise, but someone said "Windows 3.11" which isn't really an OS in itself as it sits on top of MS-DOS 6.22 (if anyone starts saying that all versions of WIndows sit on top of MS-DOS they're going to get slapped!), and so the context was how quickly Windows takes to start. By default, Win311 won't automatically start once MS-DOS has finished loading as well.
@ the thread in general
How on earth did we get onto OS boot times when talking about x86 versus PPC anyway? What has that got to do with the price of fish? Personally I prefer a longer booting time in exchange for more things of my choice cached, hence the reason why my PC loads a 256MB recoverable ramdisk on startup, which adds a significant amount to the boot time! :-)
Anyway, as for the argument, x86 versus PPC, that has been going on since the dawn of time and I don't thank whoever brought it up *again*, but there are plenty of reasons to *stay* PPC, mainly because Amiga has *already* gone to PPC. Other than that, I would prefer a slower, cooler and quieter system to a faster, noisy and annoyingly hot-running system. From first-hand experience. Then there's "why not", after that there's "Windows owns x86 already, let's not also try to compete on that platform", then there's "if the Amiga market expands significantly, then PPC prices will come down, and maybe development of the architecture will speed up", and then there's "let's not start this argument ever again, please!"
-
If you want your Windows installation to fly, stick loads of RAM (1GB or more) in your PC and install HyperOS (http://www.hyperos2002.com/)
It runs the entire OS from a RAM drive. Amiga like responsiveness. It has to be seen to be believed.
-
If you want your Windows installation to fly, stick loads of RAM (1GB or more) in your PC
Or just CONFIGURE IT PROPERLY.
-
Or just CONFIGURE IT PROPERLY.
Believe me, I could tweak and configure a Windows PC to the limit, I've been coding for the architecture since 1993 so I know how to get the absolute best out of the hardware and the OS. It still isn't as responsive as when running it off HyperOS.
-
That would say very little for HyperOS if it did, considering a OS running off a hard disk versus off a ramdisk :-)
But 'acceptable performance' is what is being looked for by most people, and most people do not know even the basics of getting decent performance out of Windows ("Should they have to learn so much about it?" is a good question), yet they'll still complain about it till kingdom come.
And as for the buffoons on comp.sys.amiga.advocacy who claim that their 060-based Amiga is somehow better, more responsive, whatever (hardware wise particularly) and faster than an up-to-date, decent spec PC...gawd.
-
And as for the buffoons on comp.sys.amiga.advocacy who claim that their 060-based Amiga is somehow better, more responsive, whatever (hardware wise particularly) and faster than an up-to-date, decent spec PC...gawd.
User perception of responsiveness is what it's all about though. Ever used QNX. Closest thing to Amiga OS in responsiveness terms I've ever seen, and that includes BeOS and Linux with it's pre-emp patches and so forth.
-
I skimmed this last page but... PPC is just fine, so what if it costs a bit more(several hndred bucks), computers aren't something normal people buy a lot of. Besides if sheeple can be made to buy Windows instead of getting Linux for much less, who says we can't get away with larger prices? Also, Apple makes money on its hardware (especially them big flat screens) Eyetech can too, and that makes them much mroe willing to help out I'm sure. 1.4Ghz Xp machine here. Runs fine, about as fast as my 7Mhz Amiga (in a relative sense, phoenix loads in about the same time as final copy.. I do realize how much smaller final copy is but big->compact software makes a really large difference... Phoenix on that Amiga, I'd go get a snack before it'd be done)
ED: Oh yeah, and doesn't AmigaOS4 have a Hardware Abstraction Layer thingy, which IIRC means it can like be ported very easily to many platforms...???
-
@jeffmix
Actually it's MorphOS with the Hardware Abstraction Layer, as
Hyperion/Eyetech have opted to use uBoot as their booting mechanism
rather than the industry HAL called OpenFirmware.
However, HAL covers the peripherals, not the CPU. To be cross-CPU,
you need a virtual processor, which brings up AmigaDE, Java, Forth,
Lisp, Ada, Squeak, Smalltalk, Rebol, Pascal...
-
A middle-end PC: about the spec you'd get for 1000 UKP. My (over-extravagant) Pegasos setup cost me £700, all in (minus monitor).
What kind of CPU and motherboard does this 1000 UKP PC includes?
$2500 AUD would get you near top end X86 PC(white box)... At that price one could kit-bash dual AMD Athlon MP box.
Note that Aussie dollar is pretty weak against US dollar, and it's weaker against British Pound.
it's obsolete far too fast. You'd be lucky to play the new games at the time,
GPU and RAM is the key to run games such as UT2003/Unreal2. When running an Athlon based system, nForce II is the recommended chipset.
An Athlon 1800+/nForce2/Geforce4 TI/512MB PC2700 RAMs (example of year 2002 system) is more than enough to run UT2003.
This kind of system wouldn't break $1500 AUD at last year prices.
never mind in six months. Old PCs are useful for Linux and for office stuff, not for games. I've been through this twice before and have two PCs that will either not work at all with modern games or will struggle badly. I have to daily watch XP utterly crawl on a 1.3GHz Athlon with a "measly" 128MB.
I have an old test machine with a similar processor i.e. Athlon Model 4 @1.333Ghz (266Mhz FSB), but with 512MB of PC133 SDRAM (MSI-6330 V5 motherboard). This particular XP Pro setup doesn't crawl.
Have you run bootvis utilities?
Have you installed the latest VIA 4in1(Hyperion 4.46) chipset and drivers? (IF you are using VIA based chipset).
Just having 128MB of RAM will cripple XP’s performance. WinXP is model on at least 256MB RAM. With ATI Radeon 9700 (test card) on test system, it was able to play the latest games without too much of a problem (even down to ~800Mhz Athlon(unlock)).
PS; I may decide to keep this card (via buying it). It’s by-by Geforce 4 TI VIVO i.e. which currently being use on my personal system.
MS Windows Server 2003 (out of the box) is alot faster than XP (out of the box).
Direct X 7 class GPU** doesn’t cut it in regards to running games such UT2003/Unreal2. **Tested with Geforce 2 MX/400, includes overclocking. This is not an option. It must be the Direct X 8.0 class card to run games like Unreal2 at reasonable speeds.
Of which there are none on the Amiga,
Not yet...
-
And just how long did it take to get through the POST test and the rest of the BIOS chuff that goes on, and then to boot DOS 6 up and all it's memory drivers and so forth? I'd guess another 30 seconds at least.
Just get Windows 3.11 installation, which fits in a single floppy and install on the hard disk.
-
remember the A.C.E consortium
also frontside bus increases are nowhere near as useful on G4/G3 as they are on 970 (according to deep document delving/reading at arstechnica.com)
edit: also IMHO AMP is better than SMP on a ppc
-
Well, the 970 has a totally different way of thinking with the two busses that do not change data direction, just keep pumping data same direction.
However, I think the difference between a 750FX at 8x100 and a 750FX at 4x200 would be noticable. For some odd reason the memory on one of these solutions would be twice as fast ;-)
-
@Hammer:
Have you looked at the Opteron yet?
A colleague of mine suggested I ask the boss for a home computer so I can work at home and stuff... I want a G4 AmigaOne running Linux, he wants me to buy a dual Opteron 1.4GHz. The Opteron is more expensive, but I'm thinking about it anyway :-)
Trouble is, Debian doesn't have an x86-64 branch ready yet...
-
Kronos wrote:
The MOS-JIT (Trance) is only available for Betatester_1-owners,
us mortal BT2s have to live with the static for the time being.
...
So the JIT still is just another marketing stunt.
"68K JIT compiler runs applications at up to 75% of native PPC speed"
WHEN is peg1&MOS going to deliver the features described (since many months) @ www.pegasosppc.com, Vesalia, etc...
-
DethKnight wrote:
remember the A.C.E consortium
also frontside bus increases are nowhere near as useful on G4/G3 as they are on 970 (according to deep document delving/reading at arstechnica.com)
G4/G3’s interface to the outside world is not aware of DDR type technologies….
133Mhz/166Mhz x 64bit (PPC’s FSB) can’t maximize the use of 266Mhz (effective) x 64 bit Memory bandwidth (PC2100).
IF one could multiply unlock the G3 processor and over clock FSB’s to 200Mhz, one could effectively use some of PC2100’s bandwidth.
-
Have you looked at the Opteron yet?
What about it?
A dual Opteron 1.4GHz vs a single 800 Mhz G4 A1(Debian Linux)??? Comparing a 64bit system to 32bit system???
The problem with X86 market there’s always a price point for delivering a solution.
One may have to wait for SIS, VIA and nVidia based solutions. I don’t have faith on Newsys in regards to making the market as a commodity. (What do you expect from ex-IBM engineers).
Lets see Newsys survives the Taiwanese/nVidia assault…
Trouble is, Debian doesn't have an x86-64 branch ready yet...
What about Debian Linux X86-32, SuSE AMD64, Windows 2003 Server X86-32 (includes PSE 36bit support)?
Building an Opteron system from pricewatch.com
(in USD).
CPU: $ 299 Opteron @ 1.4Ghz (OEM).
Motherboard: $ 525, MSI K8DMaster-F (AMD built chipset).
Total: $824 USD OR ~$1,276.02 AUD.
(I'll find cheap K8 Taiwanese brand later )
Do you know a pricewatch like website for PPC?
From http://www.vesalia.de/?V02b0f1553554e12795d59545208514e01101f0954414752050140090a1e31115479633a223c6373744e03263f2a2a7661053964606222687c2e3475551a71297b0d6e5a45500b6e4
G4 7451@800MHz AmigaOne-XE (includes AOS4(when it's completed), Debian Linux).
Total: $937.27 USD
I'll look for better G4 7451@800MHz AmigaOne-XE. package.
I wonder IF Amiga.org can host pricewatch.com like website for PPC market.
From http://www.eyetech.co.uk/search.php?SearchStr=&SearchCat=AMA1
(Any shopping features like Dell.com (sigh))
Total:
500 UKP(minus VAT) for AmigaOne-XE m/b w/ G4 7451@800MHz cpu.
Via http://www.xe.com/ucc/convert.cgi
Total:
$803.408 USD (with no VAT) OR $1,243.99 AUD
$944.062 USD (with VAT) OR $1,461.87 AUD
Once SIS, VIA( and nVidia enters the Opteron market those AMD K8 chipsets would be expensive by comparison. Aggressive competition should lower down the prices.
-
You forgot to add the second CPU. Not much point buy a dual CPU card and no CPUs. And the memory is more expensive. All in all, the Opteron is a faster and more expensive system. But it's a lot more bang for the buck.
And I was not comparing them, I just said the Opteron would be more expensive. I know for a fact which one would be most fun to me with AmigaOS, and it's not the Opteron. I just asked if you had actually TRIED one, not just talk about it. Like sex, you know. Those who talk most about it seldom get any ;-)
I know for a fact that some Cray machines are REALLY fast, but that doesn't mean I have to own one. It's more expensive, so I might not afford it ;-)
And making a pricewatch that compares Eyetech and Vesalia prices wouldn't excactly be any point since Vesalia buys the boards from Eyetech. You're not gonna see extreme differences unless Vesalia goes down and needs to recoup their losses or something :-P
-
Slightly relevant to the topic: New PPC CPUs from IBM (the register). (http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/30640.html)
Gobi (PPC750GX): beyond 1GHz & 1MB L2 (available @~Q3)
Mojave (PPC750VX): ~ 1.5GHz & Altivec & SMP ...
(available in y2004)
-
@ jeffimix
I skimmed this last page but... PPC is just fine, so what if it costs a bit more(several hndred bucks), computers aren't something normal people buy a lot of. Besides if sheeple can be made to buy Windows instead of getting Linux for much less, who says we can't get away with larger prices?
Almost a fair point, but for one big problem. Microsoft have such a strangle-hold on OEMs still that PCs *must* have Windows installed on them. If OEMs want to ship Windows or any MS software at all, then they face this problem.
-
@ Hammer
Just get Windows 3.11 installation, which fits in a single floppy and install on the hard disk.
Last I checked, Win311 install takes more than one disk. I think 6 or 8, but I'd have to dig out my install disks from *somewhere* in the house :-)
-
Windows 3.0 comes on 12 720k floppies!
-
Gawd, and Win311 comes on high density floppy disks. I'm looking at them right now, 8 of them! Microsoft written along the top in grey, Microsoft Windows for Workgroups written down the left side, copyright 1985 - 1993 Microsoft Corporation, All Your Rights Are Belong To Us written at the bottom!
(well, maybe I lied about the last bit)
-
The Windows 3.0 disks I scabbed from work years ago are white with a pretty blue label. :-)
-
mdma wrote:
The Windows 3.0 disks I scabbed from work years ago are white with a pretty blue label. :-)
...and thats about the best bit !! :-D
(Windows for Playgroups wasnt much of an improvement either...)