Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?  (Read 9006 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Damion

Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« on: November 21, 2004, 01:22:50 AM »
Quote

That about sums it up... there are technical merits for using a byte order agnostic CPU like the PPC... but they are outweighed by the cost benefits of the x86.


Guess it took me a while to get it, but once I realized that an _emulated_ '040 on a dirt-cheap XP mobile chip crunches numbers pretty much identical to a Pegasos G4, the advantage of something like AROS became pretty apparent.

(Talking from a strict "cost v performance" aspect here, I still miss my Pegasos and would own another if I won the lottery tomorrow, right after I bought my CLK-GTR..)

 

 

Offline Damion

Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #1 on: November 25, 2004, 08:45:15 AM »
Hi Hammer,

Quote

RC5 only highlights the lack of vector rotate functionally in the X86’s SIMDs(hence evolution from SSE->SSE2->SSE3->SSE-whatever comes next). General desktop applications doesn’t highlight this margin i.e. refer to MacOS vs Win32 comparisons. AMD and Intel’s SIMDs feature set is driven mainly by the general desktop market.


I agree with your statement, I realize RC5 isn't an accurate "across the board" comparison between PPC and x86...and that "real world" tests prove such...

To clarify a little, what I'm saying is that an Athlon Barton, emulating another CPU, benchmarks nearly as fast (or faster, depending on the benchmark) as the MPC7447 used in the Pegasos G4, while both running comparable OS's.

(i.e, run "AmigaMark" CPU benchmark on the above stated machine in WinUAE, and compare the results to the MorphOS executable of the same program (or the 68k executable to compare JIT performance)).

I realize it's not an "100% accurate" or even ideal method to compare systems ..and there are many other factors involved...my intent was simply to highlight the price/performance disparity between the two setups, both running amiga/amiga-like OS's, and then to note the potential of AROS, which runs *native* on x86 and isn't emulating '040s like WinUAE.

My apologies if you already determined that from my post, and were only making a comment.
 

Offline Damion

Re: Again, Why didn't they port Amiga OS?
« Reply #2 on: November 25, 2004, 08:45:59 AM »
-double post-