amigaone cpu ??

[elendil]

KennyR wrote:

Every app I click on is loaded almost the moment I let go of the mouse button.

Heh, here too, as long as I hold the mouse button for a short while :-)

Sorry, unconstructive, but could not resist

Sincerely,

-Kenneth Straarup.

PS: It sounds very cool, but I thought MOS had JIT? If it is not needed, then who cares, but I just thought I had heard that somewhere.

[Kronos]

@elendil

The MOS-JIT (Trance) is only available for Betatester_1-owners,
us mortal BT2s have to live with the static for the time being.

This ain't a prob as long as you use apps that call a lot into
the OS (like an editor), or are (partly) native (PuP/WOS/MOS).

It can onlybe felt if you run something that does lot of
calculating in 68k,

[mikeymike]

@ mdma

Including BIOS post will bring extremely erratic results across the board.  Some PCs get past BIOS POST so quickly that the monitor won't have had time to warm up, while others wait ages.  That's entirely down to what the manufacturer prefers.

I'm not trying to compare AmigaOS and Windows boot times, I know it's a futile exercise, but someone said "Windows 3.11" which isn't really an OS in itself as it sits on top of MS-DOS 6.22 (if anyone starts saying that all versions of WIndows sit on top of MS-DOS they're going to get slapped!), and so the context was how quickly Windows takes to start.  By default, Win311 won't automatically start once MS-DOS has finished loading as well.

@ the thread in general

How on earth did we get onto OS boot times when talking about x86 versus PPC anyway?  What has that got to do with the price of fish?  Personally I prefer a longer booting time in exchange for more things of my choice cached, hence the reason why my PC loads a 256MB recoverable ramdisk on startup, which adds a significant amount to the boot time! :-)

Anyway, as for the argument, x86 versus PPC, that has been going on since the dawn of time and I don't thank whoever brought it up *again*, but there are plenty of reasons to *stay* PPC, mainly because Amiga has *already* gone to PPC.  Other than that, I would prefer a slower, cooler and quieter system to a faster, noisy and annoyingly hot-running system.  From first-hand experience.  Then there's "why not", after that there's "Windows owns x86 already, let's not also try to compete on that platform", then there's "if the Amiga market expands significantly, then PPC prices will come down, and maybe development of the architecture will speed up", and then there's "let's not start this argument ever again, please!"

If you want your Windows installation to fly, stick loads of RAM (1GB or more) in your PC and install HyperOS

It runs the entire OS from a RAM drive.  Amiga like responsiveness. It has to be seen to be believed.

[mikeymike]

If you want your Windows installation to fly, stick loads of RAM (1GB or more) in your PC

Or just CONFIGURE IT PROPERLY.

Or just CONFIGURE IT PROPERLY.

Believe me, I could tweak and configure a Windows PC to the limit, I've been coding for the architecture since 1993 so I know how to get the absolute best out of the hardware and the OS.  It still isn't as responsive as when running it off HyperOS.

[mikeymike]

That would say very little for HyperOS if it did, considering a OS running off a hard disk versus off a ramdisk :-)

But 'acceptable performance' is what is being looked for by most people, and most people do not know even the basics of getting decent performance out of Windows ("Should they have to learn so much about it?" is a good question), yet they'll still complain about it till kingdom come.

And as for the buffoons on comp.sys.amiga.advocacy who claim that their 060-based Amiga is somehow better, more responsive, whatever (hardware wise particularly) and faster than an up-to-date, decent spec PC...gawd.

And as for the buffoons on comp.sys.amiga.advocacy who claim that their 060-based Amiga is somehow better, more responsive, whatever (hardware wise particularly) and faster than an up-to-date, decent spec PC...gawd.

User perception of responsiveness is what it's all about though.  Ever used QNX.  Closest thing to Amiga OS in responsiveness terms I've ever seen, and that includes BeOS and Linux with it's pre-emp patches and so forth.

[jeffimix]

I skimmed this last page but... PPC is just fine, so what if it costs a bit more(several hndred bucks), computers aren't something normal people buy a lot of. Besides if sheeple can be made to buy Windows instead of getting Linux for much less, who says we can't get away with larger prices? Also, Apple makes money on its hardware (especially them big flat screens) Eyetech can too, and that makes them much mroe willing to help out I'm sure. 1.4Ghz Xp machine here. Runs fine, about as fast as my 7Mhz Amiga (in a relative sense, phoenix loads in about the same time as final copy.. I do realize how much smaller final copy is but big->compact software makes a really large difference... Phoenix on that Amiga, I'd go get a snack before it'd be done)

ED: Oh yeah, and doesn't AmigaOS4 have a Hardware Abstraction Layer thingy, which IIRC means it can like be ported very easily to many platforms...

[downix]

@jeffmix

Actually it's MorphOS with the Hardware Abstraction Layer, as
Hyperion/Eyetech have opted to use uBoot as their booting mechanism
rather than the industry HAL called OpenFirmware.

However, HAL covers the peripherals, not the CPU.  To be cross-CPU,
you need a virtual processor, which brings up AmigaDE, Java, Forth,
Lisp, Ada, Squeak, Smalltalk, Rebol, Pascal...

[Hammer]

A middle-end PC: about the spec you'd get for 1000 UKP. My (over-extravagant) Pegasos setup cost me £700, all in (minus monitor).

What kind of CPU and motherboard does this 1000 UKP PC includes?  

$2500 AUD  would get you near top end X86 PC(white box)... At that price one could kit-bash dual AMD Athlon MP box.

Note that Aussie dollar is pretty weak against US dollar, and it's weaker against British Pound.

it's obsolete far too fast. You'd be lucky to play the new games at the time,

GPU and RAM is the key to run games such as UT2003/Unreal2. When running an Athlon based system, nForce II is the recommended chipset.

An Athlon 1800+/nForce2/Geforce4 TI/512MB PC2700 RAMs (example of year 2002 system) is more than enough to run UT2003.

This kind of system wouldn't break $1500 AUD at last year prices.

never mind in six months. Old PCs are useful for Linux and for office stuff, not for games. I've been through this twice before and have two PCs that will either not work at all with modern games or will struggle badly. I have to daily watch XP utterly crawl on a 1.3GHz Athlon with a "measly" 128MB.

I have an old test machine with a similar processor i.e. Athlon Model 4 @1.333Ghz (266Mhz FSB), but with 512MB of PC133 SDRAM (MSI-6330 V5 motherboard).  This particular XP Pro setup doesn't crawl.

Have you run bootvis utilities?
Have you installed the latest VIA 4in1(Hyperion 4.46) chipset and drivers? (IF you are using VIA based chipset).
 
Just having 128MB of RAM will cripple XP’s performance. WinXP is model on at least 256MB RAM.  With ATI Radeon 9700 (test card) on test system, it was able to play the latest games without too much of a problem (even down to ~800Mhz Athlon(unlock)).

PS; I may decide to keep this card (via buying it). It’s by-by Geforce 4 TI VIVO i.e. which currently being use on my personal system.

MS Windows Server 2003 (out of the box) is alot faster than XP (out of the box).  

Direct X 7 class GPU** doesn’t cut it in regards to running games such UT2003/Unreal2. **Tested with Geforce 2 MX/400, includes overclocking. This is not an option. It must be the Direct X 8.0 class card to run games like Unreal2 at reasonable speeds.

Of which there are none on the Amiga,

Not yet...

[Hammer]

And just how long did it take to get through the POST test and the rest of the BIOS chuff that goes on, and then to boot DOS 6 up and all it's memory drivers and so forth? I'd guess another 30 seconds at least.

Just get Windows 3.11 installation, which fits in a single floppy and install on the hard disk.

[DethKnight]

remember the A.C.E consortium



also frontside bus increases are nowhere near as useful on G4/G3 as they are on 970 (according to deep document delving/reading at arstechnica.com)

edit: also IMHO AMP is better than SMP on a ppc

[olegil]

Well, the 970 has a totally different way of thinking with the two busses that do not change data direction, just keep pumping data same direction.

However, I think the difference between a 750FX at 8x100 and a 750FX at 4x200 would be noticable. For some odd reason the memory on one of these solutions would be twice as fast ;-)

[olegil]

@Hammer:

Have you looked at the Opteron yet?

A colleague of mine suggested I ask the boss for a home computer so I can work at home and stuff... I want a G4 AmigaOne running Linux, he wants me to buy a dual Opteron 1.4GHz. The Opteron is more expensive, but I'm thinking about it anyway :-)

Trouble is, Debian doesn't have an x86-64 branch ready yet...

[ksk]

Kronos wrote:
The MOS-JIT (Trance) is only available for Betatester_1-owners,
us mortal BT2s have to live with the static for the time being.
...

So the JIT still is just another marketing stunt.
"68K JIT compiler runs applications at up to 75% of native PPC speed"

WHEN is peg1&MOS going to deliver the features described (since many months) @ www.pegasosppc.com, Vesalia, etc...