A-EON Technology CVBA and Varisys Ltd Announce Partnership

[TheGoose]

WTF is going on in here ?

[Calen]

Something like this? http://amigairc.amigarevolution.com/traitors.html

Wow..What a blast from the past that was. All my old Undernet buddies pretty much filled his entire hate list . Nice people they are to.

Yeah... he was quite well known back in the day.  I fortunately seemed to have avoided him it seems.

[dreamcast270mhz]

WTF is going on in here ?

Someone forgot to take their medicine I suppose, no... Make that several. It isn't really worth it and by now we need this thread locked, i understand I may not be a mod, but with all this bullshit between users intentionally causing trouble, the mods seem to be absentee as long as they can. Would it kill those who like to fight on forums to take it elsewhere, maybe to afterdawn or someother place where you can just duke it out? And will it kill the mods to step in and lock this before it gets like this? You all are always too late to these things, and let tasteless punks screw up a usually calm community. All I can say is for these morons who love to troll :STFU!

[B00tDisk]

No one brings up Cooksey anymore.

Sigh...

Didn't he give up and go over to scream at Atari users about the Jaguar not being 64 bit or 32 bit or something?

[amiga92570]

Guys... Please... No personal attacks, even if they are mild they produce reports. Also please refrain from phallic shaped computer cases, this is a family oriented site. I don't feel like moderating the minor stuff, but it is distracting and upsets some members.

Ok, no Phallic shaped objects like A-Eon has on there site.:roflmao:

[A1260]

Someone forgot to take their medicine I suppose, no... Make that several. It isn't really worth it and by now we need this thread locked, i understand I may not be a mod, but with all this bullshit between users intentionally causing trouble, the mods seem to be absentee as long as they can. Would it kill those who like to fight on forums to take it elsewhere, maybe to afterdawn or someother place where you can just duke it out? And will it kill the mods to step in and lock this before it gets like this? You all are always too late to these things, and let tasteless punks screw up a usually calm community. All I can say is for these morons who love to troll :STFU!

Too much caffeine?

[DAX]

So then the Amigaone X-1000 will be this PC case http://www.fractal-design.com/?view=product&category=2&prod=32 and a modified variant of this embedded module, as a motherboard http://www.varisys.co.uk/vm31.html

I do hope they realize that the particular case they chose, has a flaw in their USB wiring cables that go to the front of the case (they are wrongly wired).

Not exactly, the vm31 is just a PASemi CPU coupled with a network adapter, a lot of work went on to design nemo you can read more about it here

And yes Aeon announced way back, they had contacted and made deals with parts suppliers in order for them to deliver "Amiga versions" of their products (revised if defective ) they also have a guy designing the cardboard box art, which I think adds a nice touch.

[ffastback]

Maybe i should also report you on AmigaWorld for calling people names and liars?

No need, he still has 22 days until his latest ban is over on AW.net

[Karlos]

It isn't really worth it and by now we need this thread locked, i understand I may not be a mod, but with all this bullshit between users intentionally causing trouble, the mods seem to be absentee as long as they can.

That's not the case, myself and Red very much still here. As a rule, we have a fairly relaxed moderation policy and expect users to be mature enough for the most part to not engage in this sort of petty bickering.

However, you'd be most unwise to take that as an open invitation to take the mickey. As the rules state, warnings are almost always given, but never twice to the same person.

[Amiga_Nut]

Oooof bit warm in here *puts on flame proof jacket*

I personally don't see the issue with the CPU being dual core (or whatever) and OS4 not supporting multi-threading. This is normal, the CPU comes first, the OS makes the best of the features of the highest end hardware capable of running said OS. 64bit CPUs came before 64bit Windows (which was a disaster in the case of XP64 btw so they can hardly make a worse job of it)

So in essence we have a G5 PowerPC unit? I mean in terms of CPU power ghz per ghz. The reason Apple left PPC for Intel was simple, laptops. The G5 was never going to make it into the laptop market and Apple are not stupid, laptop sales in the middle of the last decade were on the up and up and a very desirable piece of tech....exactly the kind of thing Apple thrives on. There's nothing wrong with the G5 CPU for desktops. Also my only issue with x1000 is value for money, if it was 600 dollars and included a capable GPU then great I would have zero problems with it.

PS I'm not totally up on side lines or older PPC stuff, Cell is where it's at (and Xenon if IBM were clever enough not to be screwed by a Microsoft exclusivity contract of course) so that was a genuine question about the relative sophistication of the x1000 CPU mooted at in this thread.

[dreamcast270mhz]

That's not the case, myself and Red very much still here. As a rule, we have a fairly relaxed moderation policy and expect users to be mature enough for the most part to not engage in this sort of petty bickering.

However, you'd be most unwise to take that as an open invitation to take the mickey. As the rules state, warnings are almost always given, but never twice to the same person.

Hmm, then you expect them to work it out amongst themselves, we'll see whether that works.

[unusedunused]

I'm sure google will bring up something.


The PA6T:

Are fabbed at 65nm process
Dual core, 32/64-bit
Have altivec
Run beyond 2GHz (haven't found a direct source for the ceiling, but 2.5GHz is quoted a lot).
TDP of ~7W @ 2GHz
Upto 8MB L2 cache (configurations from 512K upwards) with "MOESI" cache coherency (see AMD64 docs for more on that).
Virtualisation/Hypervisor features
Dual integrated DDR2 memory controllers at ~1066MHz

can you post links to this ?
there was TDP of 25 Watt written here.and more of 7 Watt for average.

http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT032607001221&p=2

The pa6 is a slow embedded CPU(there is no wonder possible.less power bring less performance /MHZ but for sure better as AMCC) and i doint think it give performance /MHZ of a G4

the only benchmark i know of pa6 is this.

http://www.coremark.org/benchmark/index.php?pg=benchmark

here pa6 is not so good(around, as AMD. and PA6 have lots bigger caches.
but thats the only benchmark i know of pa6 so i only write i think pa6 is little slower as G4, but to say it is a little slower need more benchmarks of pa6.

The Intel Atom is called as a slow CPU.this are the values of 2 threads

P.A. Semi PA6T-1682M 1.7GHz GCC 4.3.2(Debian 4.3.2-1.1) ____ coremark/MHZ= 3.234___ 5497.80 2 PThreads

Intel Atom N270 1.6GHz GCC4.4.1____ coremark/MHZ= 2.855 __ 4567.253 2:PThreads vote 02/18/10

this Atom N270 is no real 2 core CPU.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Atom

It have only hyperthreading.But you can see in Core mark /MHZ its only 13% slower as a Pa6 in single core value.

modern X86 are lots faster as Atom CPU, and i think a G4 is also much more faster as 16% as a Atom CPU.

also the ATOm CPU have very small 1.Level caches.lots smaller as pa6.also the 2. level cache of ATOM is smaller

when i see the heatsink of the X1000 i see not that this is able to cool a pa6t.

The heatsink look realy small on the CPU, if it should be a pa6 CPU it have a TDP of 17 Watt.

When look at passive Heatsink specs, a 53 mm * 53 mm *16 mm Heatsink have a rate of 7,3 Kelvin /Watt.

http://www.conrad.de/ce/de/product/188549/PGA-CPU-KUeHLKOeRPER-53-X-53-MM/SHOP_AREA_27805&promotionareaSearchDetail=005

Its a german page, but you can look at the value R th .... 7.3 K /W

This mean a CPU that use 1 Watt increase the temperature in the Heat sink of 7,3 Kelvin.

A CPU with a TDP of 10 Watt increase temperature of 73 Kelvin of the heatsink.To get real temperature in the CPU, you need add the Kelvin of the surrounding temperature too.
Airflow give better values.so there are use Fans on the Heatsink, when TDP get over 10 Watt.

I think the X1000 CPU can not have more TDP as 6 Watt CPU with this HeatSink and a pa6t as X1000 CPU is maybe then not possible.

maybe somebody that have see the X1000 can give more precise info about the HeatSink size of the X1000.

But because the X1000 Heatsink is not so high and have not so much free space, i think it have higher Kelvin /Watt as 7.3

the better cooler is of course this with lower Kelvin /Watt.

[Karlos]

@Bernd_afa

Most of the info on the PA6T is repeated here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PWRficient

Also see: http://www.hotchips.org/archives/hc18/2_Mon/HC18.S2/HC18.S2T1.pdf

-edit-

Your linked coremark benchmark page puts a 1.7GHz PA6T in the same range as the Core 2 Duo ~1.6GHz:

CPU: P.A. Semi PA6T-1682M 1.7GHz
Compiler/OS: GCC 4.3.2 (Debian 4.3.2-1.1)
Coremark/MHz: 3.234
Coremark: 5497.80
Threads: 2 pthreads
Benchmarked: 06/17/09

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo 1596MHz
Compiler/OS: GCC4.3.0 20080428 (Red Hat 4.3.0-8)
Coremark/MHz: 3.421
Coremark: 5459.87
Threads: 2 pthreads
Benchmarked: 06/09/09

Of course, there are many more powerful intel processors than that, but compared to existing PPC processors found in OS4 boxes, that should be a big step up. Alas when comparing to freescale CPU's you can't find any G4 processors on that benchmark site. Or at least I didn't see any.

Usual benchmark caveats apply but the conditions used don't seem too different.

[unusedunused]

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo 1596MHz
Compiler/OS: GCC4.3.0 20080428 (Red Hat 4.3.0-8)
Coremark/MHz: 3.421
Coremark: 5459.87
Threads: 2 pthreads
Benchmarked: 06/09/09

Of course, there are many more powerful intel processors than that, but compared to existing PPC processors found in OS4 boxes, that should be a big step up. Alas when comparing to freescale CPU's you can't find any G4 processors on that benchmark site. Or at least I didn't see any.

Usual benchmark caveats apply but the conditions used don't seem too different.

but look on this page there is another 1,6 GHZ Core 2 Duo and other that reach 5000 or 6000 Coremark  /MHZ.the value of 3400 this core 2 duo get you post is too low.maybe the test run only single thread


http://www.eembc.org/benchmark/reports/benchreport.php

Edit:

I look on the link you post and search for TDP, but i do not find this word.

when you search in google pa6t tdp you find the 25 Watt often.
here is also a link

http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/Apple-acquires-Linuxfriendly-chip-vendor/

so because of the small heatsink of the X1000, it can be possible that there is no pa6t in.but what CPU is it then

maybe amcc design a new CPU with altivec and 64 bit.....
but thats really strange too, because normaly they announce such things years before series production start, so Hardware /Software developers have enough time to bring OS to this CPU.

also new design CPU use always DDR 3 i think

[Karlos]

but look on this page there is another 1,6 GHZ Core 2 Duo and other that reach 5000 or 6000 Coremark  /MHZ.the value of 3400 this core 2 duo get you post is too low.maybe the test run only single thread

It's possible, though the test I quoted the results for stated 2 pthreads were used.

http://www.eembc.org/benchmark/reports/benchreport.php

From the above, I get this:

SQL ERROR ON QUERY:You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near ') ORDER BY B.hardware, B.benchmark_cert_date DESC' at line 1
SQL=SELECT B.benchmark_seq, B.suite, B.platform, B.hardware, B.software,display_company_user_flag, B.benchmark_notes, B.certification_status, B.score_url, B.certified_by_lab, B.benchmark_cert_date, B.power_energy_flag, B.mark1, B.mark2, B.mark3, B.mark4, B.mark5, B.mark6, B.mark7, B.mark8, B.mark9, B.mark10, B.mark11, B.power_mark1, B.power_mark2, B.power_mark3, B.power_mark4, B.power_mark5, B.power_mark6, B.power_mark7, B.power_mark8, B.power_mark9, B.power_mark10, B.power_mark11, U.first_name, U.last_name, U.company, CT.description as certification_type_desc, BT.description as benchmark_type_desc, ST.mark_tm, ST.mark_tm2, ST.mark_tm3, ST.mark_tm4, ST.mark_tm5, ST.mark_tm6, ST.mark_tm7, ST.mark_tm8, ST.mark_tm9, ST.mark_tm10, ST.mark_tm11, ST.power_mark_tm, ST.power_mark_tm2, ST.power_mark_tm3, ST.power_mark_tm4, ST.power_mark_tm5, ST.power_mark_tm6, ST.power_mark_tm7, ST.power_mark_tm8, ST.power_mark_tm9, ST.power_mark_tm10, ST.power_mark_tm11, ST.score_col1_flag, ST.score_col1_pro_desc, ST.score_col1_sim_desc, ST.score_col2_pro_desc, ST.score_col2_sim_desc, ST.score_col5_pro_desc, ST.score_col5_sim_desc, ST.score_col6_pro_desc, ST.score_col6_sim_desc FROM Benchmark B INNER JOIN BenchmarkType BT ON BT.benchmark_type = B.benchmark_type INNER JOIN CertificationType CT ON CT.Certification_type = B.certification_type INNER JOIN Suite ST ON ST.suite = B.suite LEFT JOIN User U ON U.user_seq=B.user_seq WHERE B.benchmark_seq IN () ORDER BY B.hardware, B.benchmark_cert_date DESC

:roflmao:

Edit:

I look on the link you post and search for TDP, but i do not find this word.

when you search in google pa6t tdp you find the 25 Watt often.
here is also a link

http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/Apple-acquires-Linuxfriendly-chip-vendor/

so because of the small heatsink of the X1000, it can be possible that there is no pa6t in.but what CPU is it then

maybe amcc design a new CPU with altivec and 64 bit.....
but thats really strange too, because normaly they announce such things years before series production start, so Hardware /Software developers have enough time to bring OS to this CPU.

also new design CPU use always DDR 3 i think

The 7W figure is on the wikipedia page. However, looking at it again, I notice that it doesn't actually say what this figure is for, just "7W @ 2GHz". When I saw it, I must have automatically assumed TDP.

[Karlos]

You also have to consider that if two very similarly clocked intel Core 2 duo processors show what could be an error in the benchmarking process (ie only one core rather than two), it's just as possible the same applies to the PA6T benchmark. As there's only one such benchmark for that, you've simply no way of knowing for sure.

There's another reference to 7W here, the average power dissipated when running SPEC benchmarks: http://www2.electronicproducts.com/High-performance_dual-core_processor_needs_just_14_W-article-poyjh02-jan2008-html.aspx

At 2 GHz, each core achieves a SPECint2000 score of 1,000 and a SPECfp2000 score of 1,500. Running SPEC benchmarks, each core dissipates around 7 W max; a SPECint/W of 142.8, about four times more power efficient than a Core 2 Duo processor. The chip has a coherent, ordered crossbar interconnect, 2 Mbytes of L2 cache, two DDR2 memory controllers, and multichannel DMA and hardware acceleration engines for TCP/IP, iSCSI, cryptography-IPSEC and SSL, and RAID functions.

-edit-

Assuming those figures are for real, that's not too shabby when compared to stated G4 SPECint2000/SPECfp2000 scores. Have a look here: http://www.macintouch.com/ppcperf.html