@fishy_fis

200%! Fantasy benchmarks, not real world performance.

And Intel's marketing is HIGHLY disingenuous.

A so called i7 laptop processor actually has specs more closely related to an i3 desktop cpu.

And their integrated gpus, while improved, still pretty much suck gully water.

I know your a big fan of the X86 ISA, frankly I regret IBMs initial decision to use third party components in the PC.

It allowed a second rate cpu manufacturer to gain far too much market share.

Last edited by Beans on 25-Nov-2016 at 04:14 PM.

_________________
Amiga! "Our appeal has become more selective"

@Beans

Actually, I'm basing that number purely on my own experiences.
My c2q struggles to run one instance of psx2 at full speed. My i7 runs 2 at 100% with room to spare. Things like quick synch speed up encoding by even more.
Dolphin, again, more than twice the speed.
Both systems using the same GPU. Also 3.86ghz and 4ghz respectively.

Also, a laptop i7 is much more like a desktop i5. 4 cores, no hyperthreading. An i3 desktop is 2 cores, with hyperthreading. An i5 laptop is similar to an i3 desktop. Two cores, plus hyperthreading. Cache sizes are more inline with their desktop counterparts however. And is not like Intel are disingenuous about this. They openly advertise it.

And its not that I'm a particular fan of the x86 ISA. Im simply a fan of performance, and my wallet. Nothing else can touch x86 in these regards. When something does I'll happily use it for power tasks.
Its not like I don't have 68k (my a1200+'040 card), arm (rpi2+3), and ppc (dual g5@2.7ghz) machines too.
They're part of the reason I use x86 for tasks requiring power. Nothing else touches it.

Last edited by fishy_fis on 25-Nov-2016 at 08:41 AM.

@terminills

I guess you think you're pretty clever so this is my youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/RansMrVideo where you can find 3 different reviews (and a 4th in preperation). Warning! they are in Hebrew in order of expanding our community and reaching to old Amigans from the 80's and 90's which my dad used to know. You're pretty smart I bet you can learn the language but if not you can put it on mute and just watch It is a good enough quality. Just before that you should know I'm not objective and never claimed to be. I'm also not in a posiotion that requires it. If a demand arises that wishes me to do those in English then I'll be happy to.

About that Haynie interview maybe it is a case of being dishonest as you seem to pick and choose what suits you just like the giants and their approach to open source. Of course in that same interview he refers to usb as something he would have definitelly adopted, and the way he talks about standards it reflects its context: a time when standards were a tool to expand the use of various techonological advances that in their turn would use markets in order of reaching the end user (a very good thing that really hurt the Amiga because of its outdated approach), and which was very different from today when standards are used to control markets and ensure only the giants have what it takes to develop them. A good example of recent events is the inability of Oddysey to upload to youtube when in 2014 when I bought the X1k both it and TW could actually do it.

@wawa

I don't have all the answers, maybe you do. I don't think compromise is such an insult or a manifistation of bad decision making, and if you take the X1k as an example it has a pretty non-advanced Amd controller inside that could have been something else. All things considered sometimes you do those sorf of things in order of finally launching your underdog product ufter delays. I wasn't there so I can't tell what were the alternatives only can testify as a X1k that it gets the job done.
In light of not having all the answers a discussion is something we need to try and have, yet the way we do it makes me think it won't happen soon.

@fishy_fis

Yes I actually know Aros I even as a X1k user tried to do business with the Ares shop guys which guaranteed it would be the last time I tried it. After MorphOS if you think Amiga needs yet another derivative that is your opinion. I view is as a choice of emulation and an expansion of Amiga to small devices. On those grounds we have something in common. Only when you want it to replace 3.1 then we seperate both in what we think Amiga is and where it needs to be. Recreating the past is not it.
Other than that considering your way of approaching a discussion you can continue on your own. Be as clear as you like.

@Beans

You and Rose continue to talk about power or power per watt but I am not. I don't think it's about that and a measurement that resembles horsepower is overrated.

Last edited by Srtest on 25-Nov-2016 at 01:59 PM.

@fishy_fis

i7 mobile core counts depends on the model.
The fact that there are i7 mobile parts without hyperthreading does point to the fact that they are in reality i5 components.

And Intel strategy of intentionally crippling lower end designs so that the products they sell on the lower end don't cannibalize higher end components is just plain strange.

As far as the "only X86 can do this" contention, I can't think anything that would be valid for except proprietary software that is only available on the ISA (for example DirectX).

"Power tasks", GOD I love that contention.
Most people start throwing benchmarks of video game performance or video re-encoding times at me when they start talking about stuff like that.

Power tasks? Running a server competently that can handle a lot of traffic. THAT'S a power task.

And most of the tasks users tout as requiring the power they perceive they have are NOT mainstream uses for computers.

I will agree that multi-core X64 is quite competent at eliminating those irritating little pregnant pauses that have plagued my past machines.
But my primary point is, and has been, that Intel is hardly the sole source for this kind of performance.
Frankly, because of how it is set up, I find myself using my FX-8300 based system more often than my i7 system.
And the i7 laptop I own really makes me regret not spending the extra money for a model with a discrete gpu.

Intel integrated gpus are definitely NOT up to anything "Power" oriented (unless the need for graphic power is minimal).

Does Amiga HAVE to evolve toward X64?
Well, I'm a MorphOS user, so...that's where we're headed eventually.

Would I ever want to see an Intel monopoly?
God forbid, because they would inevitably "f" it up.

But honestly, having seen a single cpu PPC system supporting 24 concurrent threads (something I was considering a really expensive 12 core Xeon system for), the contention that there is some miraculous level of power inherent in Intel hardware is highly questionable.

It really IS a matter of what you use it for.
Why else would there be so many slower clocked Xeons that can be used primarily for concurrency, NOT brute horsepower?

Last edited by Beans on 25-Nov-2016 at 04:12 PM.
Last edited by Beans on 25-Nov-2016 at 01:46 PM.

_________________
Amiga! "Our appeal has become more selective"

@Srtest

Quote:

if you take the X1k as an example it has a pretty non-advanced Amd controller inside that could have been something else

I assume you are referring to the inclusion of the AMD SB600 Southbridge.
Before the development of the X1000 was announced, I was reworking a Freescale MPC8641D development board design that originally used a no longer available ULi component.
The SB600 was a natural replacement as it had all the same functionality and even some pinout similarities (although with less pins, more signals were multiplexed).

Your assumption that more advanced components could have been used is erroneous.

At the time AMD did not offer full documentation to later Southbridge components to outside developers (I know as I was registered with them at the time and had access to the docs on the SB600).
And yes, there were slightly more advanced components, but without complete documentation to use them AND a source to buy them from...
Hey, AMD documentation even makes it appear that their Southbridge components use a proprietary link instead of a PCIe connection, AND that they are only suited to applications with AMD cpus.

That fact that Varisys had the talent to get this all working together is a credit to their engineers.
Or has everyone forgotten how poorly the Artica S/VIA Southbridge combination worked on earlier AmigaOnes?

Last edited by Beans on 25-Nov-2016 at 04:34 PM.

_________________
Amiga! "Our appeal has become more selective"

@zidz

Quote:

zidz wrote: I just think sometimes what AmigaOS could have been today if it was released as Open Source a while ago.

Well maybe in 1995 it would have made a difference, I don't know if it wasn't already to late at this date.

We have an OS version of an Amiga compatible OS for years but it has not got half the attention the closed source version with 'the name' has.

@Srtest

Quote:

Now you're talking about those pc guys on EAB who treats Amiga as nostalgia throwback and wants to subjugate all of us to their whims. Lucky no one cares about those guys.

Your tongue-in-cheek detector is out of alignment.

_________________
"Unix is supposed to fix that." -- Jay Miner

@OneTimer1

Quote:

Well maybe in 1995 it would have made a difference, I don't know if it wasn't already to late at this date.

If anything, inertia is making open source contributions even more critical.

The "too late" argument always goes back to the issue of expectations. The Amiga is clearly an alternative computing platform - it doesn't need to compete with mainstream platforms to be feasible. But... it does need to evolve to continue to be useful and generate revenue.

Quote:

We have an OS version of an Amiga compatible OS for years but it has not got half the attention the closed source version with 'the name' has.

Which really begs the question: why hasn't the AROS effort been leveraged?

Unlike Hyperion, which is bound by the terms of a licensing agreement, Cloanto has the ability to do whatever they want with 3.1.

So why provide a legitimate open source version of 3.1 to assist with legacy support and make porting to other CPUs at least a consideration?

@terminills

Quote:

Please explain to me what makes AOS4.x/PPC so wonderful?

I'd be interested in any thoughts on this as well.

Setting aside PPC compatibility, what are the main differences between the classic and PPC implementations of AOS?

Quote:

Unlike Hyperion, which is bound by the terms of a licensing agreement, Cloanto has the ability to do whatever they want with 3.1. So why provide a legitimate open source version of 3.1 to assist with legacy support and make porting to other CPUs at least a consideration?

Because there is no (direct) money to be made by open sourcing it: doing so would waste what they invested to acquire it.

Amiga is and has always been about the money.

Not that I agree with that: I would have released kickstart ROMs for free for non commercial use for a long long time. And would open source what could be open sourced (I guess lots of code could not be open sourced though) too.

Last edited by Leo on 25-Nov-2016 at 09:54 PM.

_________________
http://www.warpdesign.fr/

@zidz

Quote:

If we take a look around we have AROS and WarpOS for example, imagine that the time spent on those projects may have gone in directly into the original AmigaOS instead.

Never saw the benefit of WarpOS, compared to the official solution, PowerUP.

Sure, "Only Phase5 accelerators support PowerUP, all other PPC accelerators will use WarpOS instead." argument - which later turned out to be "none", as predicted by many.

Also, consider that both MorphOS and later AmigaOS chose something closer to PowerUP (the monstrous ELF - Nice to see the teams agree on something occassionally!) - why is that?

Quote:

Just think about how it would look like if it was running on a x86 platform instead, it may been a cheaper hardware to buy and the adoption of the new AmigaOS may have been wider.

Never understood this argument, could you explain it in a bit more detail?

Q: Why is PowerPC so expensive?
A: It's not that expensive really. Ebay etc. are full of low priced PowerPC Apple hardware. Even if lower spec, it's enough for more lightweight operating systems, that lack any more demanding modern games etc. anyway.

Q: Why is AmigaOS hardware so expensive?
A: According to the deal between Hyperion and Amiga inc. - AmigaOS may only run on "dedicated AmigaOne branded hardware". All "custom, low production amount" hardware is expensive, and PowerPC definitely isn't an exception.

Q: Why would dedicated, custom "X86 AmigaOne" be significantly cheaper?
A: ?

Last edited by Jupp3 on 25-Nov-2016 at 11:39 PM.

@Jupp3

The main benefit of WarpOS was to flush only dirtied portions of the code cache instead of dumping the whole thing when context switching took place. It was smart policy considering that the L1 code cache of the PPC CPUs of the era used 32k code cache while the AmigaOS code was originally designed to work on 0.25k code cache. Now that context switches are gone, the benefits of WarpOS are gone as well.

@Beans

You've missed what I actually said.

Nothing can touch x86's raw grunt at its price. No matter how you shape it this is the way things are.
Also I mentioned 2 typical end user uses. Emulation. There's nothing around other than x86 that can emulate systems like a Wii, a Wii U, a ps2, and so on to a decent level. These are typical end user uses that require raw grunt.

Additionally I have 3 screens connected to my main PC. On an average day I'm running Windows, OS4, Linux, and OS3 concurrently (I use a dedicated box for AROS).
No other system allows me to do this in a decent sort of way. And its nice and affordable.

As I already said I favor performance and my wallet, with a bonus of flexibility. There's no attachment to any particular ISA but for what an architecture offers me. X86 is untouchable in these regards.

you are all wrong.

the only way ahead is making Windows 10 open source, and porting it to 68k.

@Jupp3

Quote:

According to the deal between Hyperion and Amiga inc. - AmigaOS may only run on "dedicated AmigaOne branded hardware".

May I ask for link supporting your claim?

@ne_one

Quote:

Unlike Hyperion, which is bound by the terms of a licensing agreement, Cloanto has the ability to do whatever they want with 3.1.

I'm not sure about this, I think Cloanto's rights are restricted to the parts where it herdly touches Hyperion's rights and interests.

And I don't know if Cloanto has some real interests in a further development of AOS3.1 ... but they supported some AROS Bounties for 68k

Last edited by OneTimer1 on 27-Nov-2016 at 02:19 PM.

@pavlor

Quote:

May I ask for link supporting your claim?

Sure.

From decmcewenshow_case_doc.pdf, from page 7 line 7 onwards:
Quote:

OS 4 .. as a stand-alone version for the Target Hardware (defined as powerPC based hardware developed for the Amiga platform) and as an OEM version shipped as part of the AmigaOne computer and a license to use Amiga trademarks in conjunction with the Amiga One.

Of course nowadays, this probably can be quite safely ignored. However, as I see it, this is the #1 reason for "AmigaOS4 hardware" being expensive, not "not being X86".

And no idea why Hyperion still seems to (partially) obey that. On the other hand, one could ask about general lack of updates first.

@Jupp3

Quote:

From decmcewenshow_case_doc.pdf, from page 7 line 7 onwards: Quote: OS 4 .. as a stand-alone version for the Target Hardware (defined as powerPC based hardware developed for the Amiga platform) and as an OEM version shipped as part of the AmigaOne computer and a license to use Amiga trademarks in conjunction with the Amiga One. ... And no idea why Hyperion still seems to (partially) obey that.

1st possible Reason:
They have no rights/licence for a port to non PPC hardware

2nd possible Reason:
They have no money for a port to x86 especially for the parts only available as object code.

@Jupp3

Old news.

Quote:

Of course nowadays, this probably can be quite safely ignored.

2009 Settlement Agreement is only known legally binding document between Amiga and Hyperion. 2001 Agreement you cite was directly superseded by point 22 of 2009 Agreement.

By terms of the 2009 Agreement, Hyperion can release OS4 on any hardware.

@Jupp3

Quote:

AmigaOS may only run on "dedicated AmigaOne branded hardware"

So Pegasos2 is "dedicated AmigaOne branded hardware" to you.

@OneTimer1
AmigaOS dev team and Hyperion have said many times that anybody can volunteer and sign a contract with them to port AmigaOS to any hardware you like. Two brothers can't do all work which requires a lot bigger number of people. I guess anybody in the community who could do it are working already for one of the camps or have left the community long time ago and are not looking back.

@all
I'm wondering how there exists people with such hard heads that any words don't go through their skulls. Or are some fantasies so important to some that they can't let them go.

@zidz
Daedalus said it all.

Last edited by Tomppeli on 27-Nov-2016 at 11:29 PM.
Last edited by Tomppeli on 27-Nov-2016 at 11:28 PM.

_________________
Rock lobster bit me. My Workbench has always preferences. X1000 + AmigaOS4.1 FE
"Anyone can build a fast CPU. The trick is to build a fast system." -Seymour Cray