Here's the first specs for the new Amiga from Amiga Inc.

[DrBombcrater]

Point is that you don't NEED a super fast CPU to run AmigaOS

This argument keeps getting rolled out to defend slow hardware, and it's very true - a 400MHz processor with no L2 cache and a 64-bit bus is fine for running OS4.

But, you know, most people like to do something other than boot the OS and stare at a pretty desktop. And many applications most certainly do need more power than that. Much more.

Will it have enough power to play DVDs? If so, will it take 100% CPU time and leave the system unable to multitask? Somebody earlier in this thread mentioned using a TV card. Is a 400MHz CPU enough to decode the output from a DVB-T or DVB-S card? I don't know, but I wouldn't bet my bank account on it.

What about emulators like UAE? Or tasks like OCR scanning?

Using not just a 400MHz processor, but a crippled 400MHz processor relegates this thing to the status of a very basic dev box. The 'quirky' specs don't help - 2 gigabit ethernet ports, but no IDE and only 1 memory slot?

[DrBombcrater]

And I say again your point is? If you need more power buy the high-end machine.

The 'high-end' system, whatever its specs, is going to be irrelevant. The number of people prepared to pay that kind of money for an OS4 box, given OS4's present lack of apps and uncertain deveopment fate is tiny.

A cheap system that had a reasonable degree of power is the only thing that will succeed now, because enough people may be willing to take a risk if the price isn't too bad.

But if playing DVDs or running UAE on OS4 requires £1000 hardware then all this hot air about OS4 being so frugal and efficient starts to look incredibly stupid, and sales are going to be miserable.

[DrBombcrater]

Playing DVDs shouldn't be a very processor hoggingtask if the player isn't to clogged with bells and whistles, since my Compaq Presario with 233 MHz PII and 64 Mb SDRAM is enough playing MPEG2 compressed DVDs with no lag.

Yes, if by 'bells and whistles' you mean any of the processes DVD playing software uses to improved picture quality beyond the most basic decoded output.

(And you get more Power per MHz on a PowerPC than an Intel).

That is somewhat unlikely when the PowerPC chip in question is derived from a 12-year old core, has no L2 cache and a cut-in-half memory bus.

[DrBombcrater]

For example, I wonder what the time difference is between encoding an MP3 in UAE on a reasonable spec PC compared to using PPC native code on an A1.

Not quite what you're after but some time ago I did such a test using Amithlon, which is generally less than 10% quicker than UAE on  purely CPU-bound tasks like MP3 encoding (most of Amithlon's speed comes from its fast disk and screen I/O).

Using Lame on a 33.6MB WAV file took 72.6 seconds for a 600MHz A1-SE, 100.2 emulated on a 1.6GHz Athlon XP 1700, and 69.5 on an Athlon XP 3200.

So I suspect any modern x86 like an Athlon X2 or C2D wouldn't have any trouble running UAE faster than any present or proposed PPC Amiga hardware.

Be nice to have some hard figures on that, however.