@Overflow

true,
vapire is one thing in my mind too.

_________________
I love Amiga and new hope by AmigaNG
A 500 + ; CDTV; CD32;
PowerMac G5 Quad 8GB,SSD,SSHD,7800gtx,Radeon R5 230 2GB;
MacBook Pro Retina I7 2.3ghz;
#nomorea-eoninmyhome

@TRIPOS

Quote:

TRIPOS wrote: @tlosm Hear the voice from the puppeteer: [quote]eliyahu wrote:

You foolish heretic, living in the error...

Earth is not flat!

Earth is a cave sferoid and in its imternal surface lies land of Agarthi, with a little sun occuping void space at the centre of the Earth!

Last edited by Raffaele on 09-Aug-2016 at 05:26 AM.

_________________
"When the Amiga came out, everyone [at Apple] was scared as hell." (J.L. Gassée, former CEO of Apple France and chief of devs of Mac II-fx, interviewed by Amazing Computing, Nov 1996).

@pavlor

Quote:

Quote: I only have found unofficial numbers but the best unofficial reference I found is 3500 to Linux and 1500 to MorphOS (in 2006, including Pegasos 1 and 2). Could you link such reference, please?

Only if I could find it again :/

Quote:

Yet, cca 3000 boards for one platforms would be much better outcome than 1500+1500 for two.

Eyetech A1 was always too expensive to me. So in reality it would be like 2000 boards for one platform or 1500+1500 for two.

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

Nobody (at least not me) says that AmigaOS4 and X5000 can´t be fun (I used and liked AmigaOS4 for many years), but strange benchmarks and facts ("QuadG5 is equal to 2012 i5") aren´t really helpful (and not honest).

For me, the AOS4-hardware isn´t the showstopper, its more the slow development of AmigaOS4 in the last few years. The X1000 is out for 6 years and still not fully supported (network, multicore).

BTW: A x86-box is just a piece of hardware, like the X5000, not "evil" and not made only for Windows. I agree that the user-experience with Windows may not as responsive as with AmigaOS4 on much slower PPC-hardware.

BUT: My HP-PC will be used mainly as AROS-Box and AROS is as small and responsive as AmigaOS4 or MorphOS. Nobody is forced to use Windows on a x86-box. On the contrary, you have a very large pool of OSes you can use: Linux, BSD, Haiku, AROS etc.

While I still like AmigaOS4 I really prefer AROS these days for my AmigaNG-needs. And developments like Vampire/ApolloCore are very interesting, too.

_________________
AmigaOne X5000/40, 2.2 Ghz, 4 GB RAM, Radeon R9 280X, M-Audio Revolution 5.1, 240 GB SSD

@AP

i write before, if you compare a 4 core 8 thred of 3.1 ghz with 3.6ghz turbo bost
and i was writing abou a mac mini i5 2.3/2.5 who is 2thread machine and yes is 2012 is not my foult... if you see my signature you understand i have an i7 too and an i3 (2015)probably more faster than your pc. but i took video and en example of one machine ... and you cant change my mind about just because i have that machine and i can and i know how it work in comparison with g5 quad...
the result was i sold my mini 2012 because did not have sense have a desktop slower than my quad in video rendering too


about my powerpc hw.
im able to run native osx,macos9,linux, amigaos and morphos .. and aros in qemu or virtualpc

Last edited by tlosm on 09-Aug-2016 at 09:05 AM.
Last edited by tlosm on 09-Aug-2016 at 09:04 AM.
Last edited by tlosm on 09-Aug-2016 at 09:00 AM.
Last edited by tlosm on 09-Aug-2016 at 08:59 AM.

_________________
I love Amiga and new hope by AmigaNG
A 500 + ; CDTV; CD32;
PowerMac G5 Quad 8GB,SSD,SSHD,7800gtx,Radeon R5 230 2GB;
MacBook Pro Retina I7 2.3ghz;
#nomorea-eoninmyhome

@tlosm

yes but you have JIT now everywhere except PPC

that is one of the reasons why I claim PPC is a toy platform in todays terms

finally no user cares if the system is inferior because of processor or software or both

@eliyahu

that is why I wrote tlosm claims that all the devs at Intel, AMD and other companies are fools when hardware from 2012 or newer is not better or even worse than PPC from 2005

@tlosm

Quote:

tlosm wrote: @AP i write before, if you compare a 4 core 8 thred of 3.1 ghz with 3.6ghz turbo bost and i was writing abou a mac mini i5 2.3/2.5 who is 2thread machine and yes is 2012 is not my foult... if you see my signature you understand i have an i7 too and an i3 (2015)probably more faster than your pc. but i took video and en example of one machine ... and you cant change my mind about just because i have that machine and i can and i know how it work in comparison with g5 quad... the result was i sold my mini 2012 because did not have sense have a desktop slower than my quad in video rendering too about my powerpc hw. im able to run native osx,macos9,linux, amigaos and morphos .. and aros in qemu or virtualpc

Than you have to be more specific, you only wrote that you can have a “race” with 2012 i5 , which isn´t true because my i5-PC is from 2012 and runs circles around your PPC-systems. For me it´s also doubtful, that your QuadG5 is really faster than a i5 macMini from 2012 (see my Link with Geekbench-results). Maybe in some rare conditions (where GPU matters etc.), but not in terms of CPU-power.

But as I said before: It doesn´t matter. X5000 is the fastes AOS4-system so far, which is fine. No need for strange benchmarks and competition with x86 (x86 will win anyway in terms of horsepower ).

BTW: My HP-PC isn´t my main-system (which is a MacbookPro 13" Retina from 2015). I just wanted a cheap, used x86-system for AROS (for me) and Win10 (for my wife - which frees my MacbookPro for me again...).

_________________
AmigaOne X5000/40, 2.2 Ghz, 4 GB RAM, Radeon R9 280X, M-Audio Revolution 5.1, 240 GB SSD

@kamelit0

I do not care about how fast windows open but about the software that is available. BTW you could optimize a lot in windows by turning off fancy features but most do not do that, partly not knowing it and partly not caring because the hardware is fast enough.

@BCP

if you say you want to use it because you like it and it is the fastest machine for OS4 then it is ok but tlosm claimed that PPC from 2005 is faster than Intel from 2012 or newer and that is nonsense

@OlafS25

You know as well as me, that MOST of amiga users (whatever branch), use it cause they enjoy their particular flavour of OS.

Making a big fuzz over some benchmark claims is just laughable, and something Ive/we have seen end up with 20+ page garbage discussions.

I got my V600 next to my Wintel PC, and I still enjoy using the V600 more than the massivly more powerful Wintel machine. There is no rational reason for that, expect a subjective enjoyment I get from it.
tlosm making wild claims are on him, but we also know that there is ALOT of unused potential in both Vampire and PPC hardware because of lack of drivers and programs utilizing the spesific hardware.
Unlocking that potential will still make them inferior to the mainstream hardware, but who cares on a hobby platform? We knew that going in.

Last edited by Overflow on 09-Aug-2016 at 10:13 AM.
Last edited by Overflow on 09-Aug-2016 at 10:10 AM.

@Overflow

You are right but it is difficult not to react if someone spreads nonsense. Imagine someone from outside accidently finds this thread and reads it, what would he/she think then. Other than that, hobby is hobby and even slow machines like Vampire can be fun. Regarding drivers, who will do them for the NG PPC hardware? On FPGA life is much easier because you can optimize the hardware for the drivers and you have any informations.

@OlafS25

Quote:

OlafS25 wrote: @BCP if you say you want to use it because you like it and it is the fastest machine for OS4 then it is ok but tlosm claimed that PPC from 2005 is faster than Intel from 2012 or newer and that is nonsense

That´s exact my point.

Last edited by AP on 09-Aug-2016 at 10:32 AM.

_________________
AmigaOne X5000/40, 2.2 Ghz, 4 GB RAM, Radeon R9 280X, M-Audio Revolution 5.1, 240 GB SSD

@Overflow

Quote:

Overflow wrote: @OlafS25 Making a big fuzz over some benchmark claims is just laughable, and something Ive/we have seen end up with 20+ page garbage discussions. .

True, but tlosm is the guy with the neverending benchmarks. And - like Olaf said - it´s hard to be quiet when there are false "facts" (QuadG5 is faster than 2012 i5 etc.). So you have to ask tlosm, why he always wants to compare with x86 etc.

I have still (classic) Amigas and enjoy them for what they are. No need to compare all the time.

_________________
AmigaOne X5000/40, 2.2 Ghz, 4 GB RAM, Radeon R9 280X, M-Audio Revolution 5.1, 240 GB SSD

@TRIPOS

Quote:

TRIPOS wrote: @AP Mmm, Sandy Bridge (2nd Generation i5). I remember that. I was considering it once, when I thought of upgrading from the first generation i7. I held my trigger though. And indeed it totally ownes the quad G5! But Core i5-2400 was released in January 2011. Half a decade ago. It would be interesting to benchmark the "G5"/"X5000" against a modern i5 as well, since we are speaking about current (and close future) computing!

The HP-PC is only my second machine, my main-system is a MacbookPro with i5 from 2015. Better I don´t make a benchmark

_________________
AmigaOne X5000/40, 2.2 Ghz, 4 GB RAM, Radeon R9 280X, M-Audio Revolution 5.1, 240 GB SSD

@AP

if the MacBook Pro is fast enough for your needs no need to benchmark

Productivity is mainly software-related today (or "Apps" how it is called today), hardware and even OS is only the platform it runs on. In this sense even a slower hardware can be more productive to you if you have more and better software for it and you are comforted to the GUI. I personal prefer Windows because of the software and you have plenty of information resources on internet when you have a problem. But that opinion is minority here

Last edited by OlafS25 on 09-Aug-2016 at 10:57 AM.

@OlafS25

Quote:

OlafS25 wrote: @AP if the MacBook Pro is fast enough for your needs no need to benchmark Productivity is mainly software-related today (or "Apps" how it is called today), hardware and even OS is only the platform it runs on. In this sense even a slower hardware can be more productive to you if you have more and better software for it and you are comforted to the GUI. I personal prefer Windows because of the software and you have plenty of information resources on internet when you have a problem. But that opinion is minority here

The benchmark-comment was more of a joke towards tlosm . i5 from last year is absolute ok for me, the MacbookPro is fast enough for all my needs (including video-editing sometimes) and I prefer MacOSX (although Windows isn´t as bad as in the past and - as you said - you have the largest software-library and tons of information. So I am not unhappy, that Win10 was preinstalled on my second-hand i5, for example to use WinUAE/AmigaForever).

Currently I am building my AROS-box with the HP I bought. To my luck, the onboard-sound is supported by AROS out of the box and AROS runs well so far with the other components (SATA, USB). Next step is to add a compatible GPU (GForce 210 is already bought) and a network card (have a spare one here).

_________________
AmigaOne X5000/40, 2.2 Ghz, 4 GB RAM, Radeon R9 280X, M-Audio Revolution 5.1, 240 GB SSD

@OlafS25 Quote:

for some Ambient is too "modern" for amiga, they wanted the look&feel from the "classics" on the NG hardware.

At the risk of unleashing the devil (zombie red vs blue war) :

I find OS4's Workbench + Filer to be similar usability to DOpus 5/Magellan (my gold standard). And I personally find both solutions to be far more usable than Ambient (or Wanderer). Nothing to do with "classic look&feel" (although that is a nice bonus), but rather I simply find it works better & easier use.

You are of course allowed to feel that Ambient works better (for you personally), but please don't claim it's objectively better.

Last edited by ChrisH on 09-Aug-2016 at 06:49 PM.

_________________
Author of the PortablE programming language.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue...

@ChrisH
Quote:

At the risk of unleashing the devil (zombie red vs blue war) : I find OS4's Workbench + Filer to be similar usability to.

I beg to differ!

Everyone knows that HDtoolbox is better and that Fords are better than Yugos.

_________________
Tinkering with computers.

MC68000 can easily race with this crappy i7. You don't believe me? Look: I can type as fast on my A500 as I can type on the MacPro i7. It's obvious from that test the I7 is a lousy energy monster that gives me no benefit over the trusty-rusty 68000.

That's benchmarking tlosm style.

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