@Templario

Despite what you might have read in this thread NO pricing for the tabor hardware was announced. The speculated numbers quoted are also vey high.

The demo at the show was Debian 8 running an HD video concurrently with the 3D Gears demo and an animated Libre Office presentation.

TrevorD

_________________
No, I don't need no reason, I'm just breezin'

@cdimauro

And this means no way around sandboxing, and sandboxing the sandbox... possibly in armed concrete to make it sure.

_________________
Scarabocchi Binari - Italian AROS Blog
Binary Doodles - English language AROS Blog

@saimon69: yes, sandboxing is the only possibility to keep the legacy on a modern, Amiga inspired, o.s..

Sandboxing plus a certain degree of resources sharing between the two worlds, to be precise. How much sharing depends on the development of tools like emumiga or vamos.

@Zylesea

Quote:

Zylesea wrote: @Birbo Quote: Birbo wrote: Tabor will: 1. Be much faster than Sam460 (AmigaOS) Will it? Lets see. AMCC 460 does 2 operations/per cock per clock, e500v2 does 2.8. And it is higher clocked than AMCC460 1200 vs 1100MHz. Both have 32-32kb L1 cache and 256 kb L2 cache. For pure integer performance the P102x clearly leads here (2200MIPS vs. 3360MIPS).

AFAIK the e500v2 is able to decode and execute up to 2 instructions per clock cycle. Exactly like the AMCC 460.

Nevertheless, it might be more efficient than the latter on doing that (more execution units, reservation stations, load/store queues, better branch predictor and/or with more entries, better TLB caches and/or more entries, and so on), so presenting better performances with real code.

Anyway, all that cannot lift the upper limit of executing a maximum of 2 instructions per clock.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: and I think also QEMU performance should increase, because now it can run in 64-bit mode using the extended set of registers. In theory, we don´t have new qemu.dll yet.

WinUAE 3.2.0 Beta 16 (64Bit) (14 October 2015)

QEMU 2.4 update: Includes both 32-bit and 64-bit versions (14 Ottobre 2015)

Finally feature-complete. Including 64-bit JIT and 64-bit PPC support

- 64-bit JIT FPU rounding mode fix and other 64-bit FPU fixes. (Frode)
- 64-bit QEMU PPC plugin fixed (Frode)

Software evolves much faster than hardware.

@TrevorDick

Quote:

Despite what you might have read in this thread NO pricing for the tabor hardware was announced. The speculated numbers quoted are also vey high. The demo at the show was Debian 8 running an HD video concurrently with the 3D Gears demo and an animated Libre Office presentation.

Sounds more than powerful enough for me as my first OS4 machine

BRING IT ON

_________________
On Planet Boing Trevor is God

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: @Dandy ... In short, the difference is that Windows (and many other o.eses) ... All this was possible due to the abstract interface provided by the o.s. to the application.

Thanks for the explanation.

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: Unfortunately the Amiga o.s. hadn't such good design practice, ... That's the reason why the Amiga o.s. never had the chance to be modernized, since it means rewriting the existing apps.

Then I don't understand why this wasn't changed when they had to re-write the OS to create OS 4.
My POV is that it is better just to re-write the OS once (properly) than to re-write all existing apps.


Cdimauro, I have another question that I already asked in my post #225, but got no reply to it yet:

Well, pavlor wrote in post #23:
Quote:

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @imagodespira ... Interesting enough P1022 SoC is more expensive than (much faster and fuly compatible) T1042 SoC ...

I'd like to know if Tabor comes with a CPU socket, so that the P1022 CPU could easily be replaced with a T1042, which should solve the problems?

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

Apologies I'm taking this thread even more off-topic but I need to address some of cdimauro's comments...

cdimauro wrote:
Quote:

In short, the difference is that Windows (and many other o.eses) never publicly exposed its data structures, and used some abstraction mechanism (handles, void pointers, getter & setter) to offer an "opaque" interface to the applications.

Um, wrong. There are numerous structures that are used in the win32 API. These are passed in/out via reference all over the place. Want window info? You get a structure. Want system info? You get a structure. Want to create a control? You pass in a structure. Want network or user information? You get a structure. etc...


Quote:

This way, it's possible to completely change the implementation without breaking the API, and it's also possible to make a 32-64 bit tunneling, like you reported.

It is my understanding that the WOW64 subsystem takes care of win32 applications running on win64 systems and does the API mapping internally.

The structure definitions are the same but of course things like pointer sizes differ on win32 and win64.


Quote:

I make another example. Windows 3 introduced the first (sub)version of the famous Win32 APIs, but such APIs are internally "tunneled" (dispatched) to the Win16 implementation. The tunneling provided a conversion mechanism to transparently send the Win32 requests to the Win16 subsystem, converting the parameters (and the return values) back and forth. That happened for all Windows 9x version. On Windows NT, instead, the Win16 requests are tunneled to the Win32 subsystem. All this was possible due to the abstract interface provided by the o.s. to the application.

Nothing abstract about the interface. It is simply structures and API calls or messages.


Quote:

Unfortunately the Amiga o.s. hadn't such good design practice, since the used (even private!) data structures were completely published. This means that (usually) it's not possible to exchange (with a tunnel mechanism) data structures between the 32 and the 64-bit subsystems.

I see no reason why similar methods as those done on Windows would not work on an Amiga OS. It may involve providing both 32 and 64 bit interfaces in the libraries, or some other method.


Quote:

Think about a Screen structure which was allocated by (for) a 64-bit application: you cannot pass it to a 32-bit application.

Windows has the same limitation. 64 bit applications cannot call 32 bit DLLs.


Quote:

That's the reason why the Amiga o.s. never had the chance to be modernized, since it means rewriting the existing apps.

Sorry but this just isn't true in my opinion.

@cdimauro

How on earth would you run 64bit Linux on a 32bit e500v2?

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@Dandy

P1022 and T1042 are not pin compatible, so it wouldn't be a CPU socket but a CPU daughtercard slot/socket deal.

Since it doesn't seem to have this from the pictures, I think we can safely assume the answer is "no".

Personally I feel it should have been a T series by now, but I guess we play the cards we're dealt.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: @Zylesea Quote: Zylesea wrote: Will it? Lets see. AMCC 460 does 2 operations/per cock per clock, e500v2 does 2.8. And it is higher clocked than AMCC460 1200 vs 1100MHz. Both have 32-32kb L1 cache and 256 kb L2 cache. For pure integer performance the P102x clearly leads here (2200MIPS vs. 3360MIPS). AFAIK the e500v2 is able to decode and execute up to 2 instructions per clock cycle. Exactly like the AMCC 460.

Indeed I messed up a number, but you were wrong, too :The e500v2 core does 2.4 MIPS/cycle/core.
It's 2880 MIPS (P1022 one core@1.2 GHz) vs. 2200MIPS (AMCC 460ex 1.1 GHz).
In pure integer calculations the P1022 should be up to 1.31times fatser than the Sam460ex.

_________________
My programs: via.bckrs.de
MorphOS user since V0.4 (2001)

@TrevorDick

Quote:

The demo at the show was Debian 8 running an HD video concurrently with the 3D Gears demo and an animated Libre Office presentation.

i would expect linux to decode and play video content on the gpu, the machine merely shoving video data through the bus. also i would expect linux to have working hardware mesa/gallium acceleration, so it shouldnt have problem with playing the simplest gl demo. i dont know what the libre office presentation do, but i expect that, similarly to video, displaying demo of office software isnt demanding what concerns the cpu or fpu. taking into account that so far i know neither full gpu, nor 3d acceleration, nor even libre office is available for os4, i doubt that such a presentation gives a reliable estimation about, how os4 would run on particular hardware.

Last edited by wawa on 15-Oct-2015 at 11:05 AM.

@Zylesea

I wonder if the Tabor would beat the Peg II in the Mplayer Prometheus-trailer benchmark.

_________________
Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card

@wawa

2x would expect
1x should(n't)
1x don't know
1x expect
1x doubt

Wow. That was a very informed post.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@olegil

yes. i think that this is a decent way of formulating doubts. im certain the involved know better than me, therefore i ask.

@olegil

Is this a drinking game? So is it two drinks for "would expect" and one for the rest? I'm so confused could you explain the rules please? :D

_________________
Support AROS sponsor a developer.

"AROS is prolly illegal ~ Evert Carton" intentionally quoted out of context for dramatic effect

@wawa

Except you had zero questions.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@terminills

I don't think a drinking game based on wawa's negative postings would be very healthy in the long run.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@olegil

people that took part at the show and talked to the Friedens reported that MESA/Gallium and LibreOffice is not around the corner regarding AmigaOS. You have better sources?

@olegil

care to explain the deeper sense of your comment. I do not understand it, propably too complicated for me

Wawa said a demo running based on Linux does not proof anything about AmigaOS, just showing hardware works. And that what was shown does not proof anything about 3D performance, expecially not on AmigaOS.

Now it is your turn

Last edited by OlafS25 on 15-Oct-2015 at 11:48 AM.