Do you approve of PPC (in some form) as the future of Amiga?

[the_leander]

In responds to Apple's G5 claims

http://www.pcworld.com/article/112749-8/64bit_takes_off.html
Athlon 64 vs. Apple G5 Systems: Not Even Close (chart)
Apple Power Macs did well on Photoshop, but the 64-bit AMD-based systems won handily on most tests.


AMD K8 Opteron 264 @2.0Ghz vs Power Mac G5 (two IBM PowerPC 970 @ 2.0GHz).

Benchmark Chart from http://www.pcworld.com/zoom?id=112749&page=8&type=table&zoomIdx=1
The AMD64 boxes debunking Apple's G5 claims i.e. 1 CPU vs 1 CPU and 2 CPU vs 2 CPU.

Intel Pentium IV is an easy target.

Tbh I didn't really follow the G5 much beyond it's launch. It's interesting to see that even afterwards, whilst some of the gap between PPC and x86 was gained, it was still on the trailing edge of performance, except, as before and as you noted: Photoshop.

RE the PIV, a power hungry, hard to cool beast it may have been, but it could still put the kosh to a G4 or a G5.

[the_leander]

The chart shows AMD64 boxes beating G5s systems in photoshop...

FFS... Yes, I know, I read it.

What I said was and I quote:

still on the trailing edge of performance, except, as before and as you noted: Photoshop.

I didn't say the G5 beat anything, just that in that particular test, it didn't perform like last years bargain bin part like it did on every other test. The numbers between the two things are in real terms only a gnats tadger apart.

That is all.

[the_leander]

For any of the current "amiga" OS's, are there any practical difference between 1 and 3 ghz ?


Will an I7 run Deluxe Paint V faster than a 68060 ?

I would expect an i7 to be able to emulate AGA significantly faster than the actual hardware. Since that was the major bottleneck to performance for Deluxe Paint, not the processor then the answer is yes, obviously.

Will Quake run better on a G5 than a G3 ?

Faster, yes, better? Depends.

Does it make a difference for Final Writer 97 if I have 1 or 8 gigs of RAM ?

Obviously not, although at this point you're verging dangerously close to strawman territory.

[the_leander]

@Thread

I can see my arguements mean nothing, I am sorry to say that today I will not be joing you all in hell. Please send Intel my regards, that I'd rather stay outside their machines. Fate forbid the Amiga community suffers BeOs's fate, I will not be drawn.

Needs more ham and over dramatization.

Please, someone kill my account. For real, I'm tire of endless debates with fuck tards.

Moar dramallama..

[the_leander]

When the software we have is between 10 and 15 years old in many cases, it becomes somewhat moot if the hardware is bleeding edge or not.

It's not an issue of being "bleeding edge", just not getting ripped off for 6+ years out of date hardware.

But there is a larger issue I think that really, really needs to be addressed.

Amiga is a retro hobby, treat it as such - see Minimig for how to do it right.

The whole AmigaNG thing is 10 years or more past being a realistic possibility and for everyone involved it's time to set it down as such.

I think the community really needs to come to terms with this.

[the_leander]

What are you talking about? Ten years ago it wouldn't even have been a possibility, let alone a realistic one; now, we're finally starting to see some progress towards a more powerful Amiga-compatible (note the emphasis on "compatible," as in "not just a generic PPC/x86 system that's adopting the Amiga name?")

What am I talking about? 10 years ago PPC was still broadly speaking a contender. It had active development behind it for the desktop market. The Amiga community was ten times or more the size it is today, we still had large numbers of commercial grade apps being developed for.

By 2003 that was all gone. All of it.

The market doesn't have to be split binarily between "direct recreations of original hardware with no extra power or features" and "bog-standard x86 clone system running software that's somewhat modelled on an older OS people liked."

This is exactly the kind of nonsense that I'm talking about.

The desktop market is saturated. It is mature and unless you have a bank balance not unlike either Sony or IBM, you are not going to make a dent into it. There is no place for Amiga outside of the retro set.

Assuming that the people behind projects like NatAmi do see them through to completion, and transition them to a business sanely (where "sane" is defined as "not charging $2300 for a 2GHz computer,") it can work.

Within the hobbyist sense maybe, as a viable business, not so much. It is doubtful the developers will ever sell enough to recoup the development costs of the natami. That's not to say however that they won't make a few quid out of it.

We live in a world where $50 will buy you a clone of a game console that used to cost $200-300; producing an affordable boosted-but-not-bleeding-edge clone of the Amiga is perfectly within the realm of possibility.

Who the hell said otherwise dingus? But a Natami is in no way going to be a contender outside of the retro crowd. As a piece of technology it is interesting and will no doubt have some pull at the geek crowd. As a mainstream desktop? Hahahah. My Tocco Lite feature phone packs more of a punch.