Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: hbarcellos on February 14, 2008, 04:40:54 PM
-
Some facts:
* UAE emulation will be fully integrated inside AROS soon (http://thenostromo.com/teamaros2/index.php?number=7).
* When running on a non-original Amiga hardware (AmigaOne, EFIKA, etc...) OS4 runs classic software through emulation (Petunia), right?
So, besides Amiga software designed to run on PPCs, what will be the difference of running AROS in a x86 box than running OS4 on AmigaOne, Pegasos or EFIKA?
I see one, there's a good chance of the x86 box being MUCH MUCH faster than the ppc based board...
Am I right?
:roll:
-
Hmm. I want to see how that "UAE integration" in AROS plays out in practice before I start comparing it with the 68k emulation in OS4.
-
That's right. Better to wait for the UAE integration to finish and see after what has to offer.
-
I saw some posts on the Amithlon discussion.
Integration is ready and functional?
Can I get latest Icaros build?
-
More philosophically speaking, the Amiga community has become so fragmented because the Amiga brand has been floundering for over 15 years. But *if* Hyperion and partners can bring back respectability and reliability, should we all stand behind a sanctioned Amiga once again or continue in a fragmented manner?
-
More philosophically speaking, the Amiga community has become so fragmented because the Amiga brand has been floundering for over 15 years. But *if* Hyperion and partners can bring back respectability and reliability, should we all stand behind a sanctioned Amiga once again or continue in a fragmented manner?
Not a fan of sanctioned, had enough of that since C= died.
-
UAE integration on AROS is working great, in my opinion it is much better than AOS by far. In short, you would not even know that the app is running on an emulator, its very seamless which was the goal.
It runs just about ANY classic app seamlessly, including those that bang the hardware (Games and demos and so on). I have not found any apps that didn't work yet, and beleive me I tried many.
In short, it is a giant leap ahead for amiga fans.
Still needs more work to be finished (sound and joystick) we are starting a new bounty for this now so I think it will be assigned and completed in
the coming months.
As far as performance... There is NO comparison.
733mhz power pc is good enough for most things, but verses 3+ghz intel/amd processors the limitations of powerpc chips become apparent fast.
Things also in development on aros : Screen dragging,Gallium 3d engine
Many apps being ported,Wanderer improvements,2 companies offering pre-installed aros computers,including aros netbooks, and much much more.
I choose AROS because its open, it can never die or be controlled by any one entity or person. It runs on many different platforms now, and is growing by leaps and bounds.
I respect the work hyperion has done to AOS but I think they have their heads in the sand when it comes to choosing what hardware their os will support. Power pc is dead dead dead. Move on or die.
Steven
-
I'd love to see amiga OS running on ARM processors. There's plenty of very cheap options out there, and it'd be easy and cheap to build a "amiga" machine, rather than relying on obscure expensive hardware or old, used mac's.
AROS will run on what you have right now though, and its very forgiving on the system resources even on a sub optimal system
-
Some facts:
* UAE emulation will be fully integrated inside AROS soon (http://thenostromo.com/teamaros2/index.php?number=7).
* When running on a non-original Amiga hardware (AmigaOne, EFIKA, etc...) OS4 runs classic software through emulation (Petunia), right?
So, besides Amiga software designed to run on PPCs, what will be the difference of running AROS in a x86 box than running OS4 on AmigaOne, Pegasos or EFIKA?
I see one, there's a good chance of the x86 box being MUCH MUCH faster than the ppc based board...
Am I right?
:roll:
It's hard to measure if AROS x86 will be much faster than AmigaOS 4.x because the Petunia JIT is only a processor-based emulation. JUAE on AROS will emulate the chipset as well as having processor JIT. The AROS emulator will be more compatible to the old hardware-banging Amiga code.
In order to run a fair comparison you'd need a whole host of Amiga chipset emulation software for OS 4 including Blitzen, Nalle Puh, and CIAgent plus a Copper coprocessor emulation that doesn't exist yet.
-
It is fast even when it is running on a virtual machine? I never managed to install Aros natively on any of my hardwares. Ill try it on a recently got old 1ghz dell latitude. But ill probably have to end using it with a microxp vmware installation.
Btw, is that version out yet?
-
Well let's see... one is free, the other one costs money. I know which one gets my vote.
It's hard to call it an Amiga with no chipset or ROM on the motherboard, it's more like an Amiga compatible.
My biggest issue is drivers, cosmetics and naming rights are secondary.
-
It is fast even when it is running on a virtual machine? I never managed to install Aros natively on any of my hardwares. Ill try it on a recently got old 1ghz dell latitude. But ill probably have to end using it with a microxp vmware installation.
Btw, is that version out yet?
Yes it is. See http://www.icarosdesktop.com/.
-
UAE integration on AROS is working great, in my opinion it is much better than AOS by far. In short, you would not even know that the app is running on an emulator, its very seamless which was the goal.
It runs just about ANY classic app seamlessly, including those that bang the hardware (Games and demos and so on). I have not found any apps that didn't work yet, and beleive me I tried many.
In short, it is a giant leap ahead for amiga fans.
Still needs more work to be finished (sound and joystick) we are starting a new bounty for this now so I think it will be assigned and completed in
the coming months.
First, sound and joystick should have been the priority there. UAE uses AHI and lowlevel for that, so there's no excuse. What's the point of integrating UAE if it can't even do basic stuff. :)
Now about UAE integration, there's absolutely no comparison with what you can actually do with the 68k emulation from MorphOS/OS4. What you consider as seamless and transparent with UAE is just at best an acrobatic trick, but in practice, it's very limited.
Basically, the applications running in UAE are unaware of the host OS and vice-versa, except for a few hacks. Try for instance to drag a file from wanderer to an ASL requester shown in UAE (it could work with tricks, but i doubt it does ATM). Try addressing the REXX port of a native AROS application from an application running in UAE, it will probably won't work either. And there are many many other situations that could show how limited this integration is (though it obviously depends on the implementation). And let's not even mention the different look from native and emulated apps.
Obviously, using UAE is much more compatible, when it comes to hardware-banging apps, but then MorphOS/OS4 can also deal with that with UAE, in your so-called transparent way. But at least, for games, it doesn't matter if the integration is mostly an illusion. :)
For instance, under MorphOS, i can just doubleclick ADFs to run my hardware-banging games, or use contextmenu to run applications/WHDLoad games in UAE (reusing an already running UAE instance if needed). And for all the other applications that don't bang the hardware (which are the majority here), i just run them directly, without this UAE handbrake. :)
-
68k emulation via E-UAE has come along way for OS4.1..chekc out glUAE by saimo an :-)d EasyEAU with GUI by Cyborg. glUAE in partiular is very system integrated and allows native 68k programs to run with only a click of a button once its installed :-)
-
I see it this way:
AmigaOS 4.x : It is a an easy transition from AmigaOS 3.9, everything is familiar. It has the "Amiga" name. But it is still pretty immature, as it seems to be a victim of constant crashes. Anyway, Hyperion seems commited to fix them in the long run.
Still it has lots of quirks such as no USB 2.0 suport, something which any decent semi-modern OS has. It is propietary and closed source, meaning it depends entirely on one Company, and if that company dies, then that is most likely gonna be its end. It has a high price tag and is tyed to an old underpowered PPC architecture which is hilariously expensive.
AROS : It is not a straight-thru transition from AmigaOS 3.9, but nothing an average user cannot do. It is still immature, and was a once stagnating project, that it is now progressing very quickly. It has really good USB 2.0 support. It is open source and freely available, it is married with the cheapest and fastest architecture we have today, x86 PCs (But it can be divorced from it if needed).
Speaking about emulation, OS4 emulation is a little bit flakey, programs that hit the hardware, which means most games and demos, will not work, or at best work with issues. AROS emulation it is far from perfect, as it is not completed, but it is really good. I suggest you see it for yourself download the latest IcAROS distribution of AROS, and try it out. It is without a doubt better than OS4.
Performance wise, AROS beats the hell out of OS4. Its architecture gives AROS that freedom and power.
Bottomline: I am not biased by the love for an OS or the hate of another, it is what is. And still it is great to have them all.
Technically speaking OS4 still leaves a lot to be desired, but then a human choice on an OS, it is rarely based on its various technical aspects, but rather on the subjective personal experience/desires/feeling they see/get that they will particularly perceive as fullfilling in that OS.
As a sidenote, there is also something that needs to be clarified: The Amiga hardware and its AmigaOS are both long dead since about the time of both the Amiga 4000T and AmigaOS 3.1. All we have here, name it Pegassos, SAM, or even an AresOne, are "Amiga-like" hardware and that happens to be the same with MorphOS, AmigaOS 4.x and AROS. It is not that they are bad or evil, it is that they are not Amigas or AmigaOS, nothing against them, just "Amiga-like". Please dont be fooled by cheap marketing or passionate advocates.
My 0.02 :)
-
@Gulliver
I would have said something but I don't need to. I agree with you 110 %.
.
-
Well since I came back to Amiga about two years ago, I have spent more money on buying real Amiga's than the cost of a Sam. This is because i always loved Amiga hardware but also to keep my A1000 company which is my favorite possession.
However, my comment is that Aros is the best successor to an Amiga running OS3.1 now and I cannot see that changing. Do not get me wrong I cannot wait to see if I can afford an X1000, but the Aros secret is that it cannot die again and will carry on forever improving now.
I believe apart from a small number of remaining issues, Aros is way better than OS3.9 on native Amiga, I have dropped back to OS3.1, and whilst OS4 is nice it has not moved far enough for me under single company control over the last 15 years. I understand the reasons and I will probably buy an X1000 but Aros is an Amiga safety net for me, it will always be around and develop the way the users want it too. Plus, like I have done a couple of times, if there is something you want done, you can make it happen with Aros by doing it yourself or paying somebody.
Steve
-
Just for the record, Icaros does not contain the upcoming UAE intergration. It does have something akin to gluae, etc., and is effective enough, but it's not the same thing. With the "real" (for lack of a better word) intergration things like screenswitching between AROS and AOS apps, AROS menus for 68k software, 68k apps in aros windows/screens, launching AOS apps from AROS Wanderer or shell (and vice-versa) and a whole lot more is available that isnt available through amibridge (Icaros'es makeshift/temproary solution), or gluae, etc. It isnt as seemless as MOS or OS4.x 68k emulation, but the end results are similar, albiet a different way of achieving this (although 68k software will be more compatible and run faster on AROSes intergration method). Try running AGA software on an a1/sam/peg2/etc. using UAE. It's very slow to the point of being unusable for the majority of software, even for "stock" aga software. Dont even bother with something like Breathless, alienbreed3d, etc., even on a Mac Mini.
-
(although 68k software will be more compatible and run faster on AROSes intergration method). Try running AGA software on an a1/sam/peg2/etc. using UAE. It's very slow to the point of being unusable for the majority of software, even for "stock" aga software. Dont even bother with something like Breathless, alienbreed3d, etc., even on a Mac Mini.
Well, if I want to run such HW hitting apps or games I do it with WinUAE. WinUAE is superior to any other UAE, including AROS one.
-
Sure, but that wasnt the question. Also after a while extra performance becomes redundant for some things, so while Winuae will be faster than other UAEs, for things using custom chipset an user wont notice it if you give a system enough raw grunt (even the heaviest of aga games/demos appear to run more or less identically on both my Windows machine running Winuae (c2d@4.1ghz) and my AROS machine using e-uae (c2d@3.86ghz using only one core).
-
Also after a while extra performance becomes redundant for some things, so while Winuae will be faster than other UAEs, for things using custom chipset an user wont notice it if you give a system enough raw grunt (even the heaviest of aga games/demos appear to run more or less identically on both my Windows machine running Winuae (c2d@4.1ghz) and my AROS machine using e-uae (c2d@3.86ghz using only one core).
WinUAE still has the best configurability options, features and usability. It's not just about speed.
I agree, this is beyond the point. I rarely use any apps that'd require use of UAE. All my favorite 68k apps run directly inside MorphOS with full speed and integration (faster than they would with my WinUAE and C2Q 3.6GHz)
-
Just for the record, Icaros does not contain the upcoming UAE intergration
So, when can we expect a build with the latest integration?
-
So, when can we expect a build with the latest integration?
Probably very soon after the finished Janus-UAE is fully released. It is now in debug and final testing.
-
I dont know. That's up to the j-uae author I guess. It's his work :) Hopefully though it wont be too far away, I'm just now getting my hands on latest build (non public) and am about to test it out.
-
bit off topic, but I'm looking forward to installing the latest AROS package on a bootable partition on my Sam flex as I'd love to be able to dual boot OS4.1 and AROS :-)
One question I have is if I will be able to print via USB on my HP LaserJet 1012 (DOT4) via AROS ?
-
More philosophically speaking, the Amiga community has become so fragmented because the Amiga brand has been floundering for over 15 years. But *if* Hyperion and partners can bring back respectability and reliability, should we all stand behind a sanctioned Amiga once again or continue in a fragmented manner?
The community will continue to be fragmented as long as Hyperion does not give them a machine with the price/performance ration they desire. AI made this mistake by delivering nothing, Hyperion will make it too if the X1000 is not reasonably priced.
Two cents.
-
@Klx300r
Sam version of AROS is getting some work done on it at the moment actually. I dont have one so I cant comment too much, but it appears it's getting some pretty heavy loving at the moment. As for printing, this is unfortunately one of the biggest pieces missing in AROS left. My printing needs are few and far between (apart from printing tech. manuals) so I dont follow this stuff a lot, but Im lead to believe half the pieces are in place, but not enough to actually print anything yet.
-
@ fishy fiz
yes I've read about it and it looks great so far!...too bad about the printing as it's very important for me to be able to print via USB as that's how my office is set up...hopefully soon :-)
-
The community will continue to be fragmented as long as Hyperion does not give them a machine with the price/performance ration they desire. AI made this mistake by delivering nothing, Hyperion will make it too if the X1000 is not reasonably priced.
Two cents.
I agree, I will say that I do not get the arguments regarding the different OS versions. I think its great to have a variety of different developers. Choose which version suits you best and use it. It is unlikely any of them are going to be teaming up together so its not like they are wasting resources. If Hyperion were developing three different OS's I could see the argument that they should combine resources and develop one version, But that is not the case. I think the competition will likely help produce an up to date useful OS, and in that case were all winners.
-
More philosophically speaking, the Amiga community has become so fragmented because the Amiga brand has been floundering for over 15 years. But *if* Hyperion and partners can bring back respectability and reliability, should we all stand behind a sanctioned Amiga once again or continue in a fragmented manner?
>But *if* Hyperion and partners can bring back respectability and reliability, should we all >stand behind a sanctioned Amiga once again or continue in a fragmented manner?
when the product is not good enough and the price is not ok, the support is slow or bad, wy should we stay behind it ?
thats always the trick of bad constructors to sell some crap under a good brand.See for example some fake rolex or something else.
it doesnt help the amiga when user accept anything.OS4 is the offical AOS, but its really a shame for that much money Preorder money, Marketing and support by devs and community flow in it since 2001 what is here.
OS4 is the only AOS System that support no USB2.
but whats here with OS4 are the great future announces.
Look at IBM/PS2 what happen with that.SO you can see if the price/quality is too bad, then there help also no nice brand.
""""
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Personal_System/2
The PS/2's controversial hardware design was tied to a marketing strategy that was similarly unsuccessful. During the 1980s, IBM's advertising of the original PC and its other product lines had frequently used the likeness of Charlie Chaplin. For the PS/2, however, IBM augmented this character with a notorious jingle that seemed more suitable for a low-end consumer product than a business-class computing platform:
“How ya' gonna' do it?
PS/2 It!
It's as easy as I.B.M.”
“How ya' gonna' do it?
PS/2 It!
The solution is I.B.M.”
Another campaign featured the actors from the television show M*A*S*H playing updated versions of their characters from the series.[1][2]
The profound lack of success of these advertising campaigns led, in part, to IBM's termination of its relationships with its global advertising agencies; these accounts were reported by Wired Magazine (Issue 3.08, August 1995) to have been worth over $500 million a year, and the largest such account review in the history of business.
Overall, the PS/2 line was largely unsuccessful with the consumer market, even though the PC based Models 30 and 25 were an attempt to address it. With what was widely seen as a technically competent but cynical attempt to gain undisputed control of the market, IBM unleashed an industry and consumer backlash. The firm suffered massive financial losses for the remainder of the decade, forfeited its previously unquestioned position as the industry leader, and eventually lost its status as the largest single manufacturer of personal computers (ironically, only after it decided to deemphasize Microchannel), first to Compaq and then to Dell. Still, the platform experienced success in the business sector where the reliability, ease of maintenance and strong support from IBM offset the rather daunting cost of the machines. Also many people still lived with the motto "Nobody ever got fired for buying an IBM." The model 55SX and later 56SX were the leading sellers for almost their entire lifetimes. Many models of PS/2 systems saw a production life span that took them well into the late 1990s.
""""
-
Really fantastic news that AROS is getting good UAE integration. I think I mentioned here two/three (or was it four) years ago, integrated 68k emu will be the killer application for AROS. Once I get some free time again I am going to participate actively in the AROS community.
OS4.1 is nice but expensive. I had a hard time motivating a 600 euro system when I did not use that as my primary workstation. I think what nailed the coffin for me was when I tried out AROS live installation on virtual system and ran AROS with the OS4 skin.
Could I tell the difference between OS4 and AROS? Yes, off course. The difference is huge, AROS is not finished yet. Did it bother me? No, not at all, because a next-gen Amiga will not become a workstation for me. Maybe with x86 AROS can have something such as WINE implemented and we can finally run Photoshop and x86 apps in Workbench environment?
Time for a new bounty? :)
-
That was the turning point for me.
That + good coding tools = Good Hobbyist machine.
That + Wine + Modern Browser with Flash support = Good Mainstream machine.
-
Well, if I want to run such HW hitting apps or games I do it with WinUAE. WinUAE is superior to any other UAE, including AROS one.
winUAE does get a lot more love, but performance wise, e-uae runs even alien breed 3D 2 nice and smooth, on my machine, which isn't a monster by any stretch.
The main benefit of the windows version is that it has more options to customize the setup.
-
BTW, talking about monster machines, Piru and fishy_fiz competing just to see who has the fastest Core 2 (Duo or Quad) was really immature, but funny! Reminded me my teenage days...
...and I don't respect anyone with something slower than an i7.
...and I stoped overclocking machines when I got myself tweaking car radiators to adapt them into my home-made watercooling solution....
hehee...
-
BTW, talking about monster machines, Piru and fishy_fiz competing just to see who has the fastest Core 2 (Duo or Quad) was really immature, but funny! Reminded me my teenage days...
...and I don't respect anyone with something slower than an i7.
...and I stoped overclocking machines when I got myself tweaking car radiators to adapt them into my home-made watercooling solution....
hehee...
I always got more interest in what you can do with limited resources. Anyone can toss more hardware at a problem. Good programming is achieving the goal with less.
Part of what fascinates me about the amiga, to this day. The stuff that was capable with 1024 kb of RAM and a 7 mhz processor :)
-
BTW, talking about monster machines, Piru and fishy_fiz competing just to see who has the fastest Core 2 (Duo or Quad)
The speed wasn't mentioned in any competitive sense.
PS. The CPU is passively cooled.
-
Huh ? Who was competeing ? I was simply saying that after a while raw speed becomes redundant for custom chipset stuff, citing my personal use of winuae vs. aros+uae and the systems I run them on. There were absolutely no, "my computer is faster than your computer" comments at all. If anything you're the one who's closest to doing such nonesense with your "I dont respect anyone who uses less than an i7" rubbish. By the way, a highly clocked core2 is faster than a standard i7, which must be confusing for you if youre going to make such claims ?
-
Aros is way better than OS3.9 on native Amiga, I have dropped back to OS3.1
AROS shell needs lots of work though, sadly - OS3.9 has IMO the best shell implementation, easily beating OS3.1.
Things lacking in AROS Shell:
* The concept of local variables - there is set and get, but the shell has no way of printing those variables, there is only global, filebased, variables.
* No backticking, only method to catch output from a program is to dump output to a file, also no piping as far I can tell - it's like being back in ancient MSDOS.
* Asterisk is neither wildcard nor "this console" as in amiga shell (compare "copy s:user-startup *" on amiga shell and AROS shell)
* There's a pure flag in the filesystem, but it seems to work opposite of intended; if you set pure flag and try to make a program resident, the shell will protest. I discovered this by accident the other day, thought for a long time that the pure concept didnt work at all.
* No hold flag in the filesystem at all for some weird rason (?!), just sparwed, not hsparwed - weird, considering that pure actually is there
* The con-handler of AROS leaves much to be desired for anyone used to KingCON or whatever :)
Other things...
In general, drag and drop is lously implemented in AROS, one cannot drop icons into filerequesters for example.
I also am one of those weirdos who easily prefer OS3.9 Workbench and ASL over these so called modern incarnations, and I have yet to grasp what the "Close" entry in the "Icon" menu of Wanderer is supposed to do - how do one close an icon? And is there no "Copy"? Makes much more sense to make a copy of an icon than to close it, if you ask me :)
Another simple issue - versions strings, man, do AROS coders have no idea how amiga os version strings work at all? :hammer:
I have lots of other issues as well, but why not leave at this for now :laughing:
-
Huh ? Who was competeing ? I was simply saying that after a while raw speed becomes redundant for custom chipset stuff, citing my personal use of winuae vs. aros+uae and the systems I run them on. There were absolutely no, "my computer is faster than your computer" comments at all. If anything you're the one who's closest to doing such nonesense with your "I dont respect anyone who uses less than an i7" rubbish. By the way, a highly clocked core2 is faster than a standard i7, which must be confusing for you if youre going to make such claims ?
Calm down Hobbyist fishy_fiz. It's probably be confusing to you, but do you know something called Irony?
Totally irrelevant, but: http://techgage.com/article/intel_core_i7_performance_preview/11
-
@kolla
Thank you for the honest and informative assessment of AROS.
We need more reporters like you.
-
Well, if I want to run such HW hitting apps or games I do it with WinUAE. WinUAE is superior to any other UAE, including AROS one.
Not to mention that you wont have to run wannabe OSes like for example MorphOS.
-
@Kolla
You obviously have a deep understanding of these things. Can't you get involved and put you skills to good use? If you like the 3.9 that influence would be ideal for linking back to the heritage.
-
I dont share the idea that I have deep understanding of these things (and most devevlopers I know would agree), to me those are just observations from a user's point of view. Yes, I should get more involved, at least fixing version strings should be trivial task :)
-
>By the way, a highly clocked core2 is faster than a standard i7, which must be confusing >for you if youre going to make such claims ?
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=29964&forum=25&19
The I7 is lots faster at same clockrate.its more than 60% this mean a 2 GHZ I7 is faster as a 3.2 GHZ Core2 or Athlon CPU.
because the bench use for all CPU exact the same simple RISC instructions, you can see what CPU have the best intern out of Order performance optimazing and register renaming features and can execute the given code at best speed.
Sure a not so good CPU design can perform maybe better with a better optimized code for the CPU, but in reality Compilers only produce best code when they can optimize well known code, the peephole optimizer are special trim for it.
So this common specint specfp say in my eyes nothing about the best CPU design, because the compiler developers know this code and can tweak the compiler for it, the CPU developers can choose a compiler that perform best.In real world programs the compilers produce not so good optimize code, and a better out of order execution give then more better performance /MHZ
Also when in I7 run only 1-2 core it can overclock.
winuae Core Duo 1,8 GHZ Notebook
Speed test for FFT + iFFT: (float)
time needed 1149ms for 413696 samples, => 4.0821852684021x speed
@44100Hz/stereo
------------ (4136 ms at 500 MHZ)
-----------------------------
winuae 3.9GHz Core i7 920.
3.harddrive0:d> fftdemo
Speed test for FFT + iFFT: (float)
time needed 312ms for 413696 samples, => 15.0334320068359x speed
@44100Hz/stereo
------------ (2433 ms at 500 MHZ)
-
As I see it...
1. Emulated applications
- AmigaOS4/MorphOS emulate 68k applications by calling native PowerPC libraries. As there's no integrated emulation for custome chips (except some basic stuff), most hardware-banging software won't run (and may easily bring the OS down).
68k applications that will work this way will be real fast (a lot faster than when run through UAE).
- AROS will call UAE when encountering 68k applications. The first thing it implies is that UAE requires a full AmigaOS 68k install or at least a compatible kickstart for simple games/demos while AmigaOS4/MorphOS don't have such requirement. So today, (freely) distributing AROS with the option to run Amiga68k applications through the UAE integration isn't possible. A kickstart replacement has been announced, but it's been 10 years at least since it's been announced, so I wouldn't hold my breath. So this is an obstacle for me.
The second difference is that UAE will run 100% of the 68k applications, not only "OS-friendly" ones, since it will emulate every custom chips. And a crash of a 68k application will only crash UAE, since the emulated application doesn't have full access to the OS'resources, unlike AmigaOS4/MorphOS'transparent emulation.
That's the big differences I can see.
2. Native applications VS emulated ones
Speedwise, some emulated applications may run slower on AROS since the emulation is a lot heavier. But native applications will run a lot faster because the x86 will be a lot faster than PPC (at least today's x86 are faster than the fastest PPC OS4/MorphOS run on: who knows ? This may change in the future ;)).
3. Compatibility
The 3 OS are binary incompatible: an AmigaOS4 executable won't run on AROS, nor MorphOS (well, could be run through OS4Emu but the author decided to stop its development, so let's forget about this option), and an AROS executable won't run on MorphOS nor AmigaOS4.
All 3 OS are source-compatible, if you don't use any of the OS'specific functions/libs and of course don't use inline ASM stuff (like Altivec code or SSE code).
Last but not least, the 3 OS lack modern features such as Memory Protection, Resource Tracking, etc... And these features can't be added without losing not only 68k compatibilty, but also today's native applications.
Oh, and btw MorphOS and AROS aren't based on AmigaOS sources. They are reimplementation of the Amiga's libraries, much like Linux is a reimplementation of original Unix, but isn't based on Unix sources.
-
Speedwise, some emulated applications may run slower on AROS since the emulation is a lot heavier. But native applications will run a lot faster because the x86 will be a lot faster than PPC (at least today's x86 are faster than the fastest PPC OS4/MorphOS run on: who knows ? This may change in the future ;)).
True, ARM may be joining x86_64 being the faster then PPC in the near future
-
@Kolla
Quote:
Just observations from a user's point of view.
Quote:
Not my user point of view. I really am just a user and do not understand 90% of your posts. It would be great if you could find enjoyment in improving things. :)
-
I think it is a myth that OS friendly 68K programs are executed faster on OS4 or MOS, because their emulation is more lightweight.
If you are not playing games, but running a "High-End" Amiga, you don't need cycle exact emulation of Custom Chips. Actually, apart from CIA, you don't need any Custom Chip emulation if you are using an RTG Screen and AHI Sound, and WinUAE is doing exactly that.
So what has to emulated is redicously cheap to emulate and costs a neglegtable amount of CPU Power. The execution of 68K programs under WinUAE has NO handbrake on, as people post here.
-
Even if I applaude Aros having UAE integration...
99 % of the time is spend on Aros is spent on NOT running emulated legacy apps.
Can somebody tell me what apps I need to run now that Ol1 is about to complete the bounty ?
PS.
I think I'll use Janus UAE most of the time for retro games in the future, that is when I feel for playing one.
-
I think it is a myth that OS friendly 68K programs are executed faster on OS4 or MOS, because their emulation is more lightweight.
Download http://aminet.net/util/moni/sspeed26.lha.
Run on a modern PC and Mini G4 and compare the results.
Graphics work 3 to 30 times faster on the G4 1.33 GHz with Radeon 9200 than on Athlon 4400 with the 9600 GT PCIe.
Both MorphOS and Amiga OS 4 have graphics.library and layers.library supported by 3d hardware.
And Radeon 9200 is still much faster than one core in modern Pc.
-
I was talking about the 68K Emu, not how well the RTG Driver supports the hardware.
WinUAE has great room for improvement here, indeed, since it is pure software as far as I know.
But if you run the test on actual 68K code, the results will look very different. See the FFT Benchmark which I wrote and Bernd send around. You can also check DSP effects of HD-Rec.
Or AmegaOne (68K), this runs much faster on WinUAE than on OS4/MOS, how come?
All I want to say is that WinUAE execution speed of 68K Code is faster than OS4/MOS. I am not comparing Gaphicscard drivers.
(http://www.a1k.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=23086&d=1265304498)
-
I was talking about the 68K Emu, not how well the RTG Driver supports the hardware.
Funny you're comparing 68k Emu and you are showing something that involves (RTG) graphics, and not really 68k... RTG Graphics stuff *is* much faster on WinUAE...
Basic CPU emulation stuff is slower on WinUAE.Now I don't know why, you should ask some developer for that. But it's a fact.
-
@Manu
Actually it's apps Im looking forward to using rather than games when 68k/uae intergration is complete. Being able to continue using old favorite apps on a modern hardware platform is one of the reasons I use AROS. The amiga charm was in its software just as much as the OS and/or hardware. No other amiga like system (os4.x/mos/aros) is likely to ever see the quality (and just plain fun) software that the classics had. Graphics software (aros has next to none, lunapaint was promising, but too immature to use, grafx2 has bugs that stop it being useful, no 3d rendering software (yet) apart from the powerful, but cumbersome (3d rendering in a shell ? no thanks) Povray), audio software is next to non existant apart from a few trackers, little in the way of development software. I could go on and on. Having access to os3.x's vast library of software is what will keep me with AROS. If it wasnt for that Id stick with Amithlon.
-
@fishy_fis
I understand what you are saying. Amiga had apps back then that was fun to use. I used Dpaint lots and Imagine. When I was in school I wrote my lab reports in Wordworth, I tried to write my final exam (thesis) in Wordworth too but as I added lots of footnotes to my document Wordworth finally took too long to rearrange the whole document when I added more footnotes to it. (WW became slow on my acclerated A1200) So I had to start over on my first win95 box in Word. That was 1996.
The reason i use Aros is because it behaves as amiga OS did. It gives me the same feeling as using an Amiga. At the moment I browse the web a lot with OWB for example. I play a few games when I feel like it, SDL ones, old Amiga goodies too. I can't lie and say I'm satisfied with Aros, sure a lot is missing, but for me I can't see that the things missing is to come via emulation of old applications. IMO the future is in the other direction, to bring more "new" apps to Aros. Part comes from porting and part comes from native apps.
I like the fact that we CAN run old legacy software and I would not want Aros not to be able to. But a few moments back in this thread it almost became a contest of which amiga-like OS runs the old software the best. I say I don't think it matters for the future, the future is not in our old applications. I have somewhat put the past behind me, I revisit it from time to time by playing old games, checking out old applications but I can't see me getting productive in those applications anymore. Not even Imagine 3D.
Lunapaint was "getting there", I would gladly use it, and suggest how to improve it (and I did) but then the development stopped so that was a dead end. Sad. I hope Mazze (that has the sources now) finds time to work on it but I doubt that, he's needed in so much other areas of Aros.
My 2 cents.
-
>Speedwise, some emulated applications may run slower on AROS since the emulation is a >lot heavier.
thats wrong since Core ix more, because PPC is not so good CPU design in compare to X86 from Year 2005 and above.Also PPC have no fast clockrates comparable to X86.
PPC need very good compilers to reach good speed.
But with emulate 68k code, the simple PPC CPU design is more worse than X86 with performance /MHZ.
You see that in this benchmark too.
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=29964&forum=25&19
In FPU X86 is more than 2* faster at same clockrate as PPC.
in integer.most time consuming things need FPU.
And with Integer X86 is too 20% faster at same clockrate on winuae
Even if winuae need emulate the chipset and PPC have a big advantage that it have enough register for 68k, and X86 must byteswap Data.The Bench need lot Data access so lot byteswaps are need but it work most in 1. Level range when the CPU have at least 32 kb 1. Level Cache.So you see a 604e get near same performance /MHZ as a Mac mini
Mac Mini 1,5 GHZ MOS 2.4
Speed test for FFT + iFFT: (float)
time needed 2020ms for 413696 samples, => 2.32199525833129x speed
@44100Hz/stereo
------------ (6060 ms at 500 MHZ)
Speed test for FFT + iFFT: (integer)
time needed 1071ms for 413696 samples, => 4.37948703765869x speed
@44100Hz/stereo
------------ (3213 ms at 500 MHZ)
winuae 3.9GHz Core i7 920.
3.harddrive0:d> fftdemo
Speed test for FFT + iFFT: (float)
time needed 312ms for 413696 samples, => 15.0334320068359x speed
@44100Hz/stereo
------------ (2433 ms at 500 MHZ)
Speed test for FFT + iFFT: (integer)
time needed 340ms for 413696 samples, => 13.7953844070434x speed
@44100Hz/stereo
------------ (2652 ms at 500 MHZ)
>Graphics work 3 to 30 times faster on the G4 1.33 GHz with Radeon 9200 than on Athlon >4400 with the 9600 GT PCIe.
graphic work faster on MOS or OS4, thats because UAE P96 cant use the GFX Card Blitter.
But who care when a benchmark say that there can 400 000 lines draw/sec or 4 Million line draw/sec.
There are just no apps that need so much line draw, and the slower GFX speed cant measure in real world apps
-
Funny you're comparing 68k Emu and you are showing something that involves (RTG) graphics, and not really 68k... RTG Graphics stuff *is* much faster on WinUAE...
Basic CPU emulation stuff is slower on WinUAE.Now I don't know why, you should ask some developer for that. But it's a fact.
Well, hard to show something that does not involve (RTG) graphics. Given that it is rendered in software, I count it as CPU intensive.
(BTW, OT: Does SDL.library use HW acceleration on OS4/MOS ?)
But I also mentioned Bernds FFT Benchmark (FPU and non-FPU version) and some HD-Rec DSP Effects (Interger and or float).