VIA Nehemiah 1.5 GHz CPU inside Amiga

[bloodline]

Tomas wrote:
I guess its possible... But i think todays g3/g4 is much faster than those via CPUs. This cpus is mostly made to consume little power and run very cool, which goes in cost of perfomance. Even a 1ghz celleron would probably outperform this 1.5g via.

You'd be surprised!!! The Via C3 are crap compared to the PIII or the Athlon, but against the G3 they are amasing... when going head to head with Clock frequency.

[bloodline]

Amiga1200PPC wrote:
Ignore him it's an idiot.

Hey  I only said I was an idiot, it was not proved...

Anyway, get yourself an 800Mhz Mini-ITX and then compare it to an 800Mhz I mac.  Even with the crap uITX Gfx chip it still hold it own, I can even run Reason on it, and run the same songs (and I push the hardware with my songs :-) ) as I can on an Imac... I'm not saying that an Imac is the ultimate example of PPC... but it's a goot idea.

Sure the C3 has crappy Floating point (anything less than 1Ghx has a half speed FPU wich is crap), the G3 is gonna beat it there every time, but the new C3's (1Ghz+) are actually really good, and very very cheap.

I'm not saying PPC is bad, no way, I like the old girl, but don't say bad stuff about the very cheap C3 until you try it, ok?  :-)

PS. AROS runs great on it ;-)

[bloodline]

yssing wrote:
compare, insert CPU, with a G3/G4 running MacOS, that is not fair to the G3/G4, MacOS runs dead slow on anything.
That is not the CPU, but the MAC.

I think comparing an IMac with MacOS and a Mini-ITX with Windows2000 (and both machines running Reason) is actually a great way to test how the CPU's perform, and I wold have to say the C3 gave me more bang for buck than the G3, I can't talk about the G4 which I'm sure is much better!

[bloodline]

olegil wrote:
I disagree. You're testing OS + motherboard + CPU and claiming the fault lies in the CPU with no real evidence. How do you know it's not the fault of the motherboard or the OS? Or even in the application having been written VERY badly for one platform. I've seen this happen...

If it's slower clock for clock than a P3, it's NOT faster than a 750CX (or at least a 750FX, which is a lot faster than the CX) clock for clock. No way.

Ok sure clock for clock blah blah... but the MAc cost something aproaching a squillion billion trillion squid* and the Mini-ITX only cost £70... you do the maths.

*Actual price exagerated for dramatic effect.

[bloodline]

olegil wrote:
Ah, so now we're suddenly comparing OS + motherboard + CPU + application + PRICE?

Whenever someone disagree with you and can actually make half an argument about it, you change the topic. Damn annoying, that is...

Why don't you just admit that you are biased and would never admit to PPC being good anyway?

That's not a fair comment. I think the PPC is a prefectly good architecture.
Ok, I do think the G3 is pathetic and the G4 is qutie good... but the new puppies from IBM should be really good.

And until these new IBM build beauties are avaiable at a decent price I will stick to the Athlon, simply because it gives me a lot of power for a very low price.

My comments have nothing what so ever to do with x86 is better than PPC or PPC is better than x86... because there is very little differeance between them (go on check out their technical documents).  I simple get what ever is the most powerfull for the best price, I have always lived by that, and that is what made me choose thwe Amiga in the first place all those years ago.  :-o