@Frek

Quote:

Do you even read other posts

Yes...

Quote:

Exactly where do you see me state a specific ratio between the CPUs?

just here:

Quote:

the Core 2 is minimum about 4 times (3.78 times to be exact)

---

Quote:

And theoretically btw... Intel Core 2 can complete up to 4 instructions per cycle (per core). Intel Atom can complete up to 2 instructions per cycle (per core). Optimally the Atom would be 50% slower per cycle, but due to lack of instruction reordering it's not even particularly likely to complete 2 instructions per cycle successfully..

Atom is hurt by being in-order but Core 2 has the problem that very little code can issue 4 instructions per cycle - and even if it could the memory system can't keep up.

_________________
Whyzzat?

@minator

You even cut the line out of context!

It still says minimum however, which means out of the test I run there was no a single test where it performed any better- however the other side is clearly specified as flexible by the line you intentially left out here.

Sure I don't think anyone in their right mind believes the Core 2 retires/issues 4 instructions per cycle in any other circumstance but the absolute optimal case.
It is however significantly more likely it will issue more instructions per cycle than the Atom does; yet you claimed the Atom and Core 2 was sometimes head to head; but I guess you talk about instruction latency which is totally uninteresting for an out of order processor such as the Core 2.

Also why no word about the 16 stage pipeline on the Atom?
The Core 2 is just 14 stage- and has logic to minimize bubbles, and even if the Core 2 was inorder its pipeline system would fill 2 cycles faster than the Atom anyway.

@all

I'm sure more than a few of you have wondered how the market research has been going on this project since @feanor's last posting here.

Posted just days ago:

Quote:

Karl wrote: Only 100 people would buy a PowerPC system?Hard to believe ...

feanor:
Quote:

Not exactly, only ~120 people sent email that they would be interested in buying a PowerPC system. I guess disbelief is hard to beat.

more here from @feanor

Today:
Quote:

I don't see it happening. I'll post details on my blog tomorrow as I promised, but so far response has been very small. I can't even convince myself to spend money on it with such numbers, let alone convince an investor.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

Honest, and fair enough.

_________________

@Gleng
Personally I would be interested (and did send an email) but I suspect most people needed proof that it was not a hoax and that Hyperion would be 100% sure to port AmigaOS4.x to whatever board was build.

No one knows if contact was ever established with Hyperion and I think most people just won't bother until they know it's serious stuff and not another joke like Troika/Iwin/Moana etc..

_________________

@Troels

Yeah, I emailed my interest too, but if the numbers don't work for Feanor, then that's that. It's nice that he's honest enough to say it's not worth doing (rather than stringing people along).

_________________

@Gleng

Quote:

It's nice that he's honest enough to say it's not worth doing (rather than stringing people along).

I didn't say it's not worth doing, I still like the idea very much. But would you spend this amount with just 120 people in your list? Yes, I agree, people might just be sceptical, but that's a vicious circle, people won't send mails if they don't see something concrete, investors won't bother if they don't see interest, etc. I can't force people to send mail, but I also can't force the investors to spend money just because I think it's "a great idea"!

Anyway, I've not dismissed it entirely, but it would just make things soooo much easier if the number was eg 300-500.

@feanor

I would be intererested,were do i send the email?

_________________

@feanor

Quote:

I didn't say it's not worth doing, I still like the idea very much. But would you spend this amount with just 120 people in your list?

That's what I meant. Not worth spending lots of money on with regards to the low numbers.

_________________

@all

I do hope this makes some impact to people though about the actual state of things. This effort was advertised on multiple websites, *including ones for other operating system*s. And yet the number is 120. That says a lot. Some of that 120 is not even the Amiga community at all.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@feanor : Too bad, this is very sad for me but I was prepared to this decision. You are right, the number of interested people is rather low ... even if some that didn't send an email asked for exotic hardware to be supported.

I keep hope to see this kind of project starting ... why not a strong argument could happen one day ... Don't know ...

I hope you will be involved in other PowerPC projects (software ones ?) because this architecture is great and deserves interest and involvement.

Thank you so much for your attempt !

@feanor

I'm sad about this decision because you seemed to be wanting the same thing as many of us : a powerful PPC board whereas what we actually get is only mid spec'ed board sized for embedded market (I'm not bashing current Hardware manufacturers I understand they should also target other markets than only our Amiga (super) tiny niche market in order to survive).

@all
Personally I sent you an email saying I would be interested in buying the board *if* and only if AmigaOS 4 runs on it, I think many other on this site could have done the same, it's not misleading feanor (at least I don't think so) to say that we are only interested by this board if it can run AOS4 (or MOS). It's only an interest market research not a pre-order commitment. Come on guys show your interest we are a lot more than a few tens !

_________________
AOS 4.1 : I dream it, Hyperion did it !
Now dreaming AOS 4.2...
Thank you to all devs involved for this great job !

@abalaban

Quote:

Come on guys show your interest we are a lot more than a few tens !

Sure, but some already have equipment, some didn't like the choices offered, etc. Even at a few hundreds (say 300) we barely make the cut feanor is looking for. It would also be a disservice to him if people emailed but really did not mean it when it came time to actually buy.

This just further makes me believe my suspicion that we are a very small community when it comes to paying types. Sure, a lot of folks hang around for nostalgia. Sure more would be paying types if the prices could approximate the PC market. But since thats not happening its probably smart for us to embrace the idea that we are a very, very small paying customer community given the small hobby market pricepoints that naturally come with very small production runs.

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 30-Oct-2009 at 05:50 PM.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@feanor

You may want to try asking again, now that we know that Amiga Inc isn't going to interfere. When you first started, there was the very real possibility hanging over our heads that Amiga Inc would win the court case, and order that Hyperion stop selling OS4. When I sent you my "count me in" email, it was very much with this thought in mind.

I agree with the poster above that said that if you can convince Hyperion to back you up with an official statement, you'd get a lot more positive responses.

Quote:

feanor wrote: @Frek that one is easy, the spursengine is much more than a 3D GPU. It might lose on 3D by any 3D chipset, but it will decode/encode HD H264 video without a sweat, try that on a GPU.

Spursengine includes H.264 hardware. AMD CAL/NV CUDA GPUs also includes H.264 hardware(decode only). H.264 encoding is done by GPU's stream processors.

As for "much more than a 3D GPU", my NV CUDA/AMD CAL GPU smacks PS3's CELL in Fold@Home.

Last edited by Hammer on 30-Oct-2009 at 07:30 PM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

@minator

Quote:

minator wrote: @Frek Quote: Do you even read other posts Yes... Quote: Exactly where do you see me state a specific ratio between the CPUs? just here: Quote: the Core 2 is minimum about 4 times (3.78 times to be exact) --- Quote: And theoretically btw... Intel Core 2 can complete up to 4 instructions per cycle (per core). Intel Atom can complete up to 2 instructions per cycle (per core). Optimally the Atom would be 50% slower per cycle, but due to lack of instruction reordering it's not even particularly likely to complete 2 instructions per cycle successfully.. Atom is hurt by being in-order but Core 2 has the problem that very little code can issue 4 instructions per cycle - and even if it could the memory system can't keep up.

Core 2 doesn't have four symmetric processing units. With Core 2, four of those instructions can be two integers(general ALU) and two floating points. Atom only has 1 integer unit (general ALU).

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

@feanor

Quote:

feanor wrote: @Frek For that matter, OpenCL could be easily ported to the Cell architecture as well.

Register count in GpGPUs kills CELL i.e. GpGPUs are optimised for matrices type math.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

@minator

Quote:

minator wrote: @Hammer Quote: Usually, modern CPUs includes a vector co-processor. ATI/NVIDIA (OpenGL3/OpenCL) GpGPU destroys any Freescale DSPs. That rather depends on the problem. DSPs tend to have a somewhat different architecture so are more general purpose than GPUs. There are problems that will run fast on DSPs that might be rubbish on GPUs. .

Refer to the desktop application context.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

Too Bad!!


Petrol.

@fairlanefastback

Quote:

This just further makes me believe my suspicion that we are a very small community when it comes to paying types.

But what exactly is the Amiga market? It's been obvious for many years that developing and supporting dedicated hardware is futile.

Perhaps someone should have polled existing, past and prospective users on if they would be willing to pay USD$150 for the operating system if it was available on a reasonably-priced general purpose platform. This would provide a good indication of the market from a business standpoint.

Beyond the hardware, the problem is compounded by fragmentation in the user base. At least some of these parties should have been cooperating years ago. Four AmigaOS variations is just plain silly.

So... anyone have any numbers on the size of the user bases for AmigaOS, MorphOS and AROS?