@Geennaam

Results after running program linked in this thread
http://www.amigans.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=59365#forumpost59365


RAGEMEM v0.37 - compiled 11/06/2010

CPU: AMCC PPC440EP 1.3 @ 799 Mhz
Caches Sizes: L1: 32 KB - L2: none - L3: none
Cache Line: 128

---> CPU ---
MAX MIPS: 1598

---> L1 ---
READ32: 2857 MB/Sec
READ64: 5676 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 2870 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 5711 MB/Sec

---> RAM ---
READ32: 299 MB/Sec
READ64: 299 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 165 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 165 MB/Sec
WRITE: 903 MB/Sec (Tricky)

---> VIDEO BUS ---
READ: 14 MB/Sec
WRITE: 50 MB/Sec

Last edited by Spectre660 on 13-Nov-2010 at 08:55 PM.

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

@delshay

Got these results on a 256 Mb µA1(by request of #6):

New Shell process 8
8.Extracts:RageMem:- ragemem

RAGEMEM v0.34 - compiled 11/02/2010

CPU: IBM PowerPC 750 GX 1.1 @ 800 Mhz
Caches Sizes: L1: 32 KB - L2: 1024 KB - L3: none

---:- L1 -:---
READ: 6089 MB/Sec
WRITE: 4061 MB/Sec

---:- L2 -:---
READ: 1249 MB/Sec
WRITE: 1012 MB/Sec

---:- RAM -:---
READ: 199 MB/Sec
WRITE: 125 MB/Sec
WRITE: 799 MB/Sec (Tricky)

---:- VIDEO BUS -:---
READ: 4063 MB/Sec
WRITE: 3048 MB/Sec

8.Extracts:RageMem:-


OldFart

EDIT: Removed lt & gt characters

Last edited by OldFart on 13-Nov-2010 at 09:33 PM.

_________________
More then three levels of indigestion and you're scroomed!

@OldFart

Could you please try again with the current version of the test?

RAGEMEM v0.37

http://crisot.free.fr/universe/files/RageMem.lha

Thanks.

#6

Last edited by number6 on 13-Nov-2010 at 09:27 PM.

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

@number6

New Shell process 8
8.RAM Disk:T/RageMem (V0.37)> ragemem

RAGEMEM v0.37 - compiled 11/06/2010

CPU: IBM PowerPC 750 GX 1.1 @ 800 Mhz
Caches Sizes: L1: 32 KB - L2: 1024 KB - L3: none
Cache Line: 32

--- CPU ---
MAX MIPS: 1598

--- L1 ---
READ32: 3037 MB/Sec
READ64: 6067 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 2701 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 4061 MB/Sec

--- L2 ---
READ32: 352 MB/Sec
READ64: 363 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 229 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 235 MB/Sec

--- RAM ---
READ32: 199 MB/Sec
READ64: 199 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 125 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 125 MB/Sec
WRITE: 798 MB/Sec (Tricky)

--- VIDEO BUS ---
READ: 13 MB/Sec
WRITE: 134 MB/Sec

8.RAM Disk:T/RageMem (V0.37)>

OldFart

EDIT: Had to remove the lt & gt characyers at the respective sides of the "---" strings

Last edited by OldFart on 13-Nov-2010 at 09:31 PM.
Last edited by OldFart on 13-Nov-2010 at 09:29 PM.

_________________
More then three levels of indigestion and you're scroomed!

@OldFart

erm...wow.

Compare with my post #36...particularly L2 cache.
Although Video Bus read is odd too.

or @bhop in post #47. Granted he's using seta1, but that's only a 10-20% boost on average.

#6

Last edited by number6 on 13-Nov-2010 at 09:39 PM.

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

@number6

Quote:

Compare with my post #36...particularly L2 cache.

What did you feed your processor?
Realy amazing differences.

And indeed your video bus is faster by a magnitude of 3.85. Odd, to say the least.

OldFart

_________________
More then three levels of indigestion and you're scroomed!

@OldFart

@bhop produced an even higher result.

@sundown...well...that's weird too. The only thing I know is different in his case is running at a way lower vcore for stability. I'm at default 1.44. Using bog standard Eyetech Apacer 256 Meg memory module.

#6

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

@number6

MicroA1 with standard Eyetech Apacer 256 Meg memory module.
VCore settings are same as when I purchased the motherboard.
Assuming that SetA1 is a separate program, I do not use SetA1.

I ran this test 3 times, first time after surfing the net for awhile, second time with OWB 3.30 running and displaying this thread, third time just after power up from AmigaShell. All results were fairly consistant. Including the last two tests.

This test was run with OWB 3.30 running and showing amigaworld thread.

RAGEMEM v0.37 - compiled 11/06/2010

CPU: IBM PowerPC 750 GX 1.1 @ 800 Mhz
Caches Sizes: L1: 32 KB - L2: 1024 KB - L3: none
Cache Line: 32

--- CPU ---
MAX MIPS: 1593

--- L1 ---
READ32: 3029 MB/Sec
READ64: 6088 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 2705 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 4059 MB/Sec

--- L2 ---
READ32: 1046 MB/Sec
READ64: 1254 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 875 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 1039 MB/Sec

--- RAM ---
READ32: 199 MB/Sec
READ64: 199 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 125 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 125 MB/Sec
WRITE: 799 MB/Sec (Tricky)

--- VIDEO BUS ---
READ: 13 MB/Sec
WRITE: 135 MB/Sec


This test was run from AmigaShell immediately after power-up.

RAGEMEM v0.37 - compiled 11/06/2010

CPU: IBM PowerPC 750 GX 1.1 @ 800 Mhz
Caches Sizes: L1: 32 KB - L2: 1024 KB - L3: none
Cache Line: 32

--- CPU ---
MAX MIPS: 1597

--- L1 ---
READ32: 3044 MB/Sec
READ64: 6088 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 2706 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 4060 MB/Sec

--- L2 ---
READ32: 1048 MB/Sec
READ64: 1256 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 873 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 1038 MB/Sec

--- RAM ---
READ32: 199 MB/Sec
READ64: 199 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 125 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 125 MB/Sec
WRITE: 799 MB/Sec (Tricky)

--- VIDEO BUS ---
READ: 13 MB/Sec
WRITE: 135 MB/Sec

--
redfox
MicroA1

Last edited by redfox on 13-Nov-2010 at 10:04 PM.
Last edited by redfox on 13-Nov-2010 at 10:01 PM.
Last edited by redfox on 13-Nov-2010 at 09:55 PM.

@redfox

You'll need to omit the carat to display.
And you will get slightly higher #s if run from a cold start.

#6

Last edited by number6 on 13-Nov-2010 at 09:54 PM.

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

@number6

MicroA1, 256MB, GX cpu.

3.System:> ragemem

RAGEMEM v0.37 - compiled 11/06/2010

CPU: IBM PowerPC 750 GX 1.1 @ 800 Mhz
Caches Sizes: L1: 32 KB - L2: 1024 KB - L3: none
Cache Line: 32

--- CPU ---
MAX MIPS: 1598

--- L1 ---
READ32: 3046 MB/Sec
READ64: 6091 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 2708 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 4062 MB/Sec

--- L2 ---
READ32: 1050 MB/Sec
READ64: 1257 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 875 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 1039 MB/Sec

--- RAM ---
READ32: 199 MB/Sec
READ64: 199 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 125 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 125 MB/Sec
WRITE: 673 MB/Sec (Tricky)

--- VIDEO BUS ---
READ: 16 MB/Sec
WRITE: 92 MB/Sec

3.System:>

Last edited by HammerD on 13-Nov-2010 at 10:03 PM.
Last edited by HammerD on 13-Nov-2010 at 10:02 PM.

_________________
AmigaOS 4.x Beta Tester - Classic Amiga enthusiast - http://www.hd-zone.com is my Amiga Blog, check it out!

@number6

What strikes me is the differences obtained by µ's deploying similar CPU's. Some sport a 750GX, some a 750FX. But even 750FX's versioned 1.1 have different L2 cache sizes. Mine has 1024 KB while I saw one with a similar CPU only reporting 512 KB. Odd again.

OldFart

_________________
More then three levels of indigestion and you're scroomed!

@HammerD

Ehm, remove the lt & gt characters please...

OldFart

_________________
More then three levels of indigestion and you're scroomed!

@Crisot

A request for maybe an upcoming next version:
Could you replace the header strings with ones omitting the lt & gt characters?

OldFart

_________________
More then three levels of indigestion and you're scroomed!

@OldFart

His post #51 explains his original purpose for the test, which I had asked him about.
However, the results here and in the clone thread on amigans.net are proving some wildly varied results, which seem to be prompting questions.

the clone thread from amigans.net

I'd advise ignoring all reports prior to Crisot's Ragemem Version 0.37, which was his latest.

#6

Last edited by number6 on 13-Nov-2010 at 10:23 PM.
Last edited by number6 on 13-Nov-2010 at 10:21 PM.

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

@OldFart

Quote:

Mine has 1024 KB while I saw one with a similar CPU only reporting 512 KB. Odd again.

Link to that one please.

I stripped out all the Micro owners reports with Ragemem version 0.37 from the AW and amigans.net thread and made a chart.
I count only 7 Micro owners responding and I don't see any L2 cache for a GX listed at anything other than 1024 KB.

With the exception of one entry each regarding VIDEO BUS, the following 4 nicks produced near identical results from the test:
@ajs, @HammerD, @Number6, and @redfox.

The main differences from the remaining 3 are in the L2 cache results.
@bhop has an FX (the only one reporting) and kills the GX owners by 50% with his results.
@OldFart has a GX like the other 6 reporting. His L2 cache results are 1/3 to 1/4 that of the rest of the group.
@Sundown has L2, RAM, and VIDEO BUS results all wildly different than anyone else. He has a vcore lower than the default of 1.44 and is using 512Meg memory, 2 obvious differences from the core group of 4 listed above.

@OldFart
Just to be sure, are you using the original Eyetech Apacer 256 Meg ram module?

#6

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

@number6

Quote:

Just to be sure, are you using the original Eyetech Apacer 256 Meg ram module?

It's the one that came with my board when I first ought it in December 2004 from Vesalia, so I guess that it's the Eyetech supplied Apacer stick.

Quote:

Link to that one please.

Sorry, must have mixed up some GX and FX figures.

/Off topic (concerns my mental health):
Off late I'm often wrong ain't I, or am I mistaken?
/Back to topic

OldFart

_________________
More then three levels of indigestion and you're scroomed!

@number6

Quote:

@OldFart has a GX like the other 6 reporting. His L2 cache results are 1/3 to 1/4 that of the rest of the group.

Reran RageMem. Here are the results:

RAGEMEM v0.37 - compiled 11/06/2010

CPU: IBM PowerPC 750 GX 1.1 @ 800 Mhz
Caches Sizes: L1: 32 KB - L2: 1024 KB - L3: none
Cache Line: 32

--- CPU ---
MAX MIPS: 1598

--- L1 ---
READ32: 3046 MB/Sec
READ64: 6090 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 2708 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 4061 MB/Sec

--- L2 ---
READ32: 1047 MB/Sec
READ64: 1250 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 875 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 1035 MB/Sec

--- RAM ---
READ32: 199 MB/Sec
READ64: 199 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 125 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 125 MB/Sec
WRITE: 799 MB/Sec (Tricky)

--- VIDEO BUS ---
READ: 13 MB/Sec
WRITE: 135 MB/Sec

Upped my L2 performance curiously quite a bit!

OldFart

_________________
More then three levels of indigestion and you're scroomed!

@OldFart

Quote:

Upped my L2 performance curiously quite a bit!

ok. We'll just pretend your former results were an anomaly. heh.
Your results now look like @ajs, @HammerD, @Number6, and @redfox.

Thanks for the report on your ram too.
That leaves @sundown as the GX odd man out, but he's not using Apacer 256Meg ram.

#6

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

@number6

256 Mb Apacer memory card, vcore at default (1.44V).

RAGEMEM v0.37 - compiled 11/06/2010

CPU: IBM PowerPC 750 GX 1.1 @ 800 Mhz
Caches Sizes: L1: 32 KB - L2: 1024 KB - L3: none
Cache Line: 32

--- CPU ---
MAX MIPS: 1598

--- L1 ---
READ32: 3046 MB/Sec
READ64: 6058 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 2694 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 4056 MB/Sec

--- L2 ---
READ32: 759 MB/Sec
READ64: 871 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 716 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 1038 MB/Sec

--- RAM ---
READ32: 101 MB/Sec
READ64: 101 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 87 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 87 MB/Sec
WRITE: 367 MB/Sec (Tricky)

--- VIDEO BUS ---
READ: 13 MB/Sec
WRITE: 85 MB/Sec

Pretty much the same as my first post with 512Mb memory card & a lower vcore. There numbers mean nothing to me, I can watch movies with DvPlayer or mplayer, my time with blender & Aladdin show very fast renders. Real World results are more important to me then meaningless benchmarks.

_________________
Hate tends to make you look stupid...

@sundown

Quote:

There numbers mean nothing to me, I can watch movies with DvPlayer or mplayer, my time with blender & Aladdin show very fast renders. Real World results are more important to me then meaningless benchmarks.

No one is arguing that. And unless someone posts exactly what we should be seeing from these numbers, all I can do is compare from the chart I made and point out the differences, in case it can help someone.

Quote:

Pretty much the same as my first post with 512Mb memory card & a lower vcore.

I disagree.

--- RAM ---
READ32: 101 MB/Sec
READ64: 101 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 87 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 87 MB/Sec

vs your former report:

---> RAM
READ32: 199 MB/Sec
READ64: 101 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 87 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 125 MB/Sec

A difference of double, I don't see as "pretty much the same"
And for L2, I see one number going way up while another went way down.
Regardless, thanks very much for running the test. I know this was a risk for you to do. (and I never asked you to take that risk, now did I?) heh.

#6

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