Amiga OS4 & CeBit 2003

[Hammer]

Juzz wrote:

Details, details man! Give us details! Give a small review if possible .

Well, I did post a small benchmark here :-D
The G4 is definitely showing some muscle and that is even without altivec support in dnetc (which I am working on with some other developers to try to get into the dnetc client)  :-P

Careful with benchmarks since one could show the opposite results.

Refer to OpenSSL benchmarks

==========================================
iMac G4 800 results
Authored by: watling on Tue, Apr 2 '02 at 07:16PM
sign verify sign/s verify/s
rsa 512 bits 0.0031s 0.0003s 319.7 3297.6
rsa 1024 bits 0.0184s 0.0010s 54.4 991.2
rsa 2048 bits 0.1236s 0.0037s 8.1 268.4
rsa 4096 bits 0.8642s 0.0137s 1.2 72.8
sign verify sign/s verify/s
dsa 512 bits 0.0031s 0.0037s 326.8 270.9
dsa 1024 bits 0.0106s 0.0132s 94.5 75.8
dsa 2048 bits 0.0382s 0.0451s 26.2 22.2
 
==========================================
Celeron 566 running Mandrake Linux 8.2

Authored by: Tarlach on Thu, Dec 12 '02 at 09:30PM
It's depressing to see my cheap Mandrake linux box (566 celeron with 190 mb RAM) beating a G4 800.

sign verify sign/s verify/s
rsa 512 bits 0.0023s 0.0002s 427.5 4915.8
rsa 1024 bits 0.0121s 0.0006s 82.6 1629.2
rsa 2048 bits 0.0729s 0.0021s 13.7 475.8
rsa 4096 bits 0.4886s 0.0074s 2.0 135.8
sign verify sign/s verify/s
dsa 512 bits 0.0021s 0.0026s 473.1 386.1
dsa 1024 bits 0.0061s 0.0075s 163.1 133.5
dsa 2048 bits 0.0208s 0.0255s 48.2 39.3
==========================================

Refer to; For Linux's install-egcs/install-glibc/cross-gcc benchmarks

On personal note; The following benchmarks would be nice.

1. Quake I and II (SW render)
2. 68K AmigaMark 2003.
3. MPEG2 to MPEG4 conversion.

$299 USD** PPC with AmigaOS 4.0(official edition) set-up would be nice.

**About $600 AUD.

Note that OGR benchmarks was also being use for Athlon XP VS Pentium 4 battle royal.

My very old Athlon 1.1Ghz delivers the following;

[Feb 18 09:41:47 UTC] Automatic processor type detection found
                      an AMD K7-4 (Athlon Thunderbird) processor.
[Feb 18 09:41:47 UTC] OGR: using core #0 (GARSP 5.13-A).
[Feb 18 09:42:07 UTC] OGR: Benchmark for core #0 (GARSP 5.13-A)
                      0.00:00:17.18 [8,413,541 nodes/sec]
[Feb 18 09:42:07 UTC] OGR: using core #1 (GARSP 5.13-B).
[Feb 18 09:42:27 UTC] OGR: Benchmark for core #1 (GARSP 5.13-B)
                      0.00:00:17.10 [8,629,686 nodes/sec]

IF I clock it to 1.33Ghz, this old box may beat your Pentium 4 2.4Ghz.

I’ll test it in Athlon XP 1800+/ASUS nForce 2-Deluxe later…    

[Hammer]

Well one of the others with an XE tested Sin against an AMD Duron 850. The timedemo yielded 10 FPS on the AMD and 19 FPS for the G4.

That claims looks a bit skewed when one compares cut-down CPU against a full-featured CPU.  

Why the AMD Duron? It's 2nd Level Cache is heavily crippled.

Those cut-down X86 chips don’t perform very well with games i.e. run Quake II (in SW mode) Athlon VS Duron.  

Why not the full featured AMD Athlon XP chip? There should be an AMD Athlon XP chip around the PPC G4 800Mhz’s price bracket.

Just be careful with the X86 based comparisons.

I’m curious why they use SIN has the game benchmark, while Quake I/II was the engine for multitude of game titles.

Did they use an Intel complier for SIN source code?
 

Quake x86 has an assembler texture mapper, whereas the PPC is using a 'C' texture mapper.

Why not recompile the same source code(i.e. C language source) for both platforms?

Could you disclose the actual benchmark setup for SIN?

X86 SIN based benchmarks was use in the late 90s (during reign of Pentium II/III 440BX era).

[Hammer]

I’ll test it in Athlon XP 1800+/ASUS nForce 2-Deluxe later…    

Athlon XP 1800+, ASUS nForce 2, WinXP-SP1
==========================================
[Feb 19 01:15:35 UTC] Automatic processor type detection found
                      an AMD K7-6 (Athlon XP/MP/-4) processor.
[Feb 19 01:15:35 UTC] OGR: using core #0 (GARSP 5.13-A).
[Feb 19 01:15:55 UTC] OGR: Benchmark for core #0 (GARSP 5.13-A)
                      0.00:00:16.71 [12,000,449 nodes/sec]
...
==========================================
Running 24 processes in the background.