AmigaONE benchmark - Important

[ikir]

See this discussion on www.iksnet.it

Is it true??? :-D  I hope yes! :-D

Discussion:
http://www.iksnet.it/forum/viewtopic.php?t=297

[ikir]

Really AmigaONE G4-800Mhz wins over P4 2,6Ghz, this without level3 cache?

[Ami603]

The origin from this posts are the AmigaOne mailing lists.and seems to be from the latests
One XE G4 systems with already 2Mb L3 cache.

[ikir]

Ami603 wrote:
The origin from this posts are the AmigaOne mailing lists.and seems to be from the latests
One XE G4 systems with already 2Mb L3 cache.

Good. But it shoul be true bacause came from the original mailing-lis :-o
This means......
AmigaONE real kick ass!!!!!!!! :-o  :-o  :-o

[Kronos]

Well if your read the actual post you would see that the client
DOES have altivec-support, and such benches are really good for
altivec.

There is no way a G4/800 could beat a P4/2600 in integer or single
data float.

And the 3rd-level-cache on the G4 is only needed because it
doesn't have any other posibility to use modern DDR-RAM, which
comes naturally for todays x86s.

[ikir]

Hi Kronos! How are you?

Yes. But this means that on software wich supports altivec AmigaOne800 wins over P4-2,6Ghz?

[ksk]

These are from a Finnish Amiga forum...

A1G3@733:
[Feb 18 10:34:17 UTC] OGR: using core #0 (GARSP 5.13 PPC-scalar).
[Feb 18 10:34:37 UTC] OGR: Benchmark for core #0 (GARSP 5.13 PPC-scalar)
0.00:00:16.78 [8,680,916 nodes/sec]

600MHz:
[Feb 17 14:24:36 UTC] OGR: using core #0 (GARSP 5.13 PPC-scalar).
[Feb 17 14:24:56 UTC] OGR: Benchmark for core #0 (GARSP 5.13 PPC-scalar)
0.00:00:16.55 [7,120,713 nodes/sec]

Athlon XP 1800+ native:
[Feb 17 10:46:36 UTC] OGR: using core #1 (GARSP 5.13-B).
[Feb 17 10:46:55 UTC] OGR: Benchmark for core #1 (GARSP 5.13-B)
0.00:00:16.71 [11,750,304 nodes/sec]

Athlon XP 1800+ & WinUAE:
[Feb 17 11:10:44 UTC] OGR: using core #3 (GARSP 5.13 68040).
[Feb 17 11:11:03 UTC] OGR: Benchmark for core #3 (GARSP 5.13 68040)
0.00:00:16.18 [2,201,927 nodes/sec]

But in the end, those results have very little relevance in real life apps.

[EntilZha]

@ Kronos

> Well if your read the actual post you would see that the client
> DOES have altivec-support, and such benches are really good
> for altivec.

Well, if *you* read the post carefully, you'll see that it says "using core #0 (GARSP 5.13 PPC-scalar)"... That means it uses the scalar, not the vector core., hence, the test ran *without* AltiVec support.

[samo79]

Mah, I have a question....The AmigaOne agains a PC have a Altivec support ?

If it don't support Altivec, I will consider that the AmigaOne G4 800 it's run like a Pentium 4 ?  :-o

samo79

http://digilander.libero.it/samo79

[ksk]

@EntilZha

Please, the OS release ... quckly, please, please ...  :-x  :-P

[ikir]

AmigaONE rocks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :-D  8-)

[LaBodilsen]

Not to burst any bobbles here,  but the P4 is a very lousy performer in RC5...  

even the posted AMD XP1800 scores should indicate that.  

Other than that,  i'm sure the A1 will still move some ass  :-)

[Hammer]

==========================================
Athlon XP 1800+, ASUS nForce 2, WinXP-SP1

[Feb 18 22:25:23 UTC] Automatic processor type detection found
                      an AMD K7-6 (Athlon XP/MP/-4) processor.
...
[Feb 18 22:25:44 UTC] OGR: using core #1 (GARSP 5.13-B).
[Feb 18 22:26:03 UTC] OGR: Benchmark for core #1 (GARSP 5.13-B)
                      0.00:00:16.31 [11,800,528 nodes/sec]
==========================================

I can probably squeeze little more performance IF I turn off the network services (e.g. bridges, internet), Norton Anti-Virus 2002, MSN messenger, Asus probe, WinXP’s GUI, OBDC services, etc and increase priority for dnetc task.

For some reason, my Athlon XP 1800+ box is faster than ksk's Athlon XP 1800+ native box.

[Juzz]

Well actually, the link is to an italian site, but I posted the info on the Yahoo groups site.
But it should be pointed out that the P4 is "only" a 2.4 GHz.
My XE has the 3rd level cache.
Nice to see what others have achieved with the hardware they have available - thx, "all" I had is that P4 2.4GHz.

And yes, it has been run without Altivec support - we are working on getting the client to use the vector core (ie. Altivec core).

And, yes, I think that it rocks :-D

[KennyR]

And the 3rd-level-cache on the G4 is only needed because it doesn't have any other posibility to use modern DDR-RAM, which comes naturally for todays x86s.

You have it the opposite way round. x86 needs modern DDR-RAM for speed because of (bad!) legacy CPU design, while PPC is the opposite and is not sped up much by fast external RAM but is sped up greatly by extra cache. This is also why PPC is so good at cache-based calculation like RC5.