@Vistaus

Gotta remember that mozilla now update FF every time some one in their office sneezes!

@SW portings

Roughly about 100% of mainstream apps run on multicore systems. Any application ported to single core system will not work as well as on the multicore system.
Another reason to fully break the single threading barrier.

((perhaps a good thing is that a lot of mainstream multicore systems use below 2Ghz CPUs))
(cheapest new PCs on local shops use AMD E1 CPU)


@almost on topic
(found a dolphin benchmark graph)
Shows how emulated PowerPC compares with a real 729 MHz PowerPC chip.
(my FX4300 should emulate PPC faster than my slow SAM, but it should be far slower than my 1Ghz MosBook)

Last edited by KimmoK on 23-Jul-2014 at 11:14 AM.
Last edited by KimmoK on 23-Jul-2014 at 11:10 AM.
Last edited by KimmoK on 23-Jul-2014 at 10:59 AM.

_________________
- KimmoK
// For freedom, for honor, for AMIGA
//
// Thing that I should find more time for: CC64 - 64bit Community Computer?

@danwood

Timberwolf takes 20 second to load on my Sam440ep-Flex.

Quote:

danwood wrote: @terminills Quote: Yes you can. Benchmark Firefox vs Timberwolf. Seriously?! You've obviously never used Timberwolf then, it can be considered an Alpha release at best, barely useable on anything less than an X1000. It takes over 2 mins to even load up on my A1XE and then consumes 100% of the CPU while loaded, certainly not at the stage it's ready for benchmark tests, it's a proof of concept really IMHO.

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

@Spectre660

Quote:

Timberwolf takes 20 second to load on my Sam440ep-Flex.

Admittedly I've not really used OS4 for a year or so, but it used to take a LOT longer on my A1XE, has Timberwolf had an update since? Thought the last release was 18 months or so now. Or maybe there were some optimisations at OS level I never saw, either way I found it way too slow to be anything but a proof-of-concept release.

@danwood

What made you give up on OS4? I remember seeing your Youtube videos where you seemed to like it.

@danwood

It is possible that some OS 4.1 components improve things.
The main issue I have with Timberwolf is that it tends to start kind of auto scrolling.
in fact the rendering may be a bit quicker than Firefox 30 under Linux on the same machine
based on use with a Radeon HD6670 via a pci to pcie adapter .


Quote:

danwood wrote: @Spectre660 Quote: Timberwolf takes 20 second to load on my Sam440ep-Flex. Admittedly I've not really used OS4 for a year or so, but it used to take a LOT longer on my A1XE, has Timberwolf had an update since? Thought the last release was 18 months or so now. Or maybe there were some optimisations at OS level I never saw, either way I found it way too slow to be anything but a proof-of-concept release.

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

@Xmas87

Quote:

What made you give up on OS4? I remember seeing your Youtube videos where you seemed to like it.

Just my A1XE started behaving really flaky, tried replacing lots of components and new RAM etc. it would crash at the most random times (sometimes seconds after the OS booted), but it was getting old and a really buggy board by design anyway.

I had been playing with MorphOS for a couple of years as well anyway, to get a new OS4 machine it would have to be a Sam 460 to be on par with my A1XE or an X1000 to be an upgrade, and both were too pricey to justify really.

So in the end I just moved all my data onto my Mac Mini G4 and started using MorphOS full time, it's been my primary "Amiga-like" OS for almost 2 years now and really happy with it. I still have my A1XE but apart from half an hour to install Dopus Magellan and Odyssey it's not really been used since early last year, it's just too unreliable now.

@thread

I feel fishy_fis wanted to compare s/w speed with AROS on older PCs vs OS4 on the SAM's, but 68k s/w isn't native on the NG systems.

_________________
Hate tends to make you look stupid...

@Spectre660

Timberwolf takes 20-30 seconds to load on my AONE500 w/ Sam460. But loading the browser is not the point. 20-30 is long, but not unacceptable in most cases IMHO. It's the performance of Timberwolf after loading the browser that just makes it not worth it. Sometimes I even have to reboot my AONE500 because everything just hangs.
Odyssey is perfect and thus I use it all the time. I even prefer it over most other browsers on other platforms.

_________________
Proud user of AmigaOS 4.1 on an AmigaONE 500. This is the first Amiga I've ever had so I don't know all the ins and outs of AmigaOS yet, so I'm sorry if I'm asking noob questions and stuff.

@danwood

It might now be of any help but the issues that I've had regarding stability has been down to a dying PSU and it runing to hot. Even though it got a good cooler with good coolingpaste etc it will still need cleaning from time to time (everey 3-6 month). It depends on the tower offcourse, the X1000 Tower (Fractal Design) got filters that rejects dust and works pretty good. Other than that it's really stable now but too slow for my taste for some tasks, especially browsing.

Other than that it's the issues that others have reported like drained battery, broken CPU-module... I'm sure you know about these issues already.

@danwood

I've seen lots of people criticise the early AmigaOne machines for being unstable etc. - but with the right set-up, they can be just fine. Unless yours is fundamentally different to mine, anyway, but I doubt that.
Quirky, yes. :) But once set up well, they can be very solid with the later versions of the OS, and certainly nowhere near as bad as many people make out.

@Spirantho @Hotrod

Well I replaced pretty much every on-board component with PCI cards, added a new PSU, extra cooling, tried about 7 different RAM sticks in it (and registered RAM is pricey), added SIL IDE card, USB etc.

It seems to drain a battery every time it was powered off, it sometimes sees a hard disk other times it wont (tried several disks), USB 2 never worked despite trying 5 different cards that other users said worked, due to random lock-ups I invested in expensive RAM off ebay only to find they either didn't work at all or had same issue. I reinstalled OS 4.1 but that seemed to make it worse.

I did have it working mostly ok for years, but by 2012 it felt like it was on its last legs, and to be honest I just didn't have the time or inclination to spend any more money or time trying to get it working properly. Last time I powered it up last year it crashed 3 times in about 5 minutes needing hard resets, it's gathered dust since.

I may look at it again one day, or more than likely sell it on to someone who has the time/effort needed to fix it up, but in all honesty I find I prefer MorphOS now anyway and the Mac Mini hardware feels a lot more reliable and solid, and at 1.5ghz it's faster than my XE anyway. I've not really missed OS4, if they ever release a PPC Mac port, I'd definitely dual boot it with MorphOS though, but I doubt that'll ever happen sadly.

Last edited by danwood on 23-Jul-2014 at 08:30 PM.

@danwood

Selling it to someone who has more time and energy to sort out what is wrong with it (if that is possible), sounds like the best proposal for your used AmigaOne system. Specially if you have other alternatives that you are satisfied with to get your "Amiga Fix".

_________________
Amiga! The computer that inspired so many, to accomplish so much, but has ended up in the hands of . . . . . . . . . .

@amigadave

Its better if people buy a new Sam460 instead, I see no point in put thing a AmigaONE-XE in to circulation it is problem machine.

My old computer is working but I think I'm just horribly lucky with how I plugged in my PCI card etc.

Maybe my hardware fixes, maybe because I replace the PSU, maybe because I sent the CPU module to ACube-System to get brunt out CPU replaced by better and faster CPU, maybe because I replaced the CPU fan, or maybe because of USB fix on front ports. Maybe because of AGA hardware fix that solved IRQ conflict with USB or Ethernet or was it PATA, don't remember.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 25-Jul-2014 at 03:51 AM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 25-Jul-2014 at 03:51 AM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 25-Jul-2014 at 03:50 AM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 25-Jul-2014 at 03:48 AM.

_________________
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/
Facebook::LiveForIt Software for AmigaOS

@NutsAboutAmiga

AmigaOne XEs can be stable (mine is as well), they just need some TLC. But an XE sitting doing nothing is a lot worse than an XE that can be fully working if it's configured just right.

I say donate it or sell it as "probably working but needs work to be stable" to someone who wants an OS4 machine but can't afford one.

@fishy_fis

Quote:

A little while ago I had the idea to test old pc hardware from the 386/486/pentium1 era against 68k amigas to see at what point pcs caught up in what areas, and in what areas the amiga couldremain competitive the longest. As it turned out I wasnt as prepared hardware wise as Id initially thought, with the slowest working machines in my posession being too fast for a fair comparison.

Sadly, this quite reminds me when my faith about Amigas being the best computers around began to die. I've been invited by a university mate at home and I could see his 25 MHz 486 PC with a unaccelerated SVGA card generating simple, but texturized 3D environments and move them at speeds my beloved AGA chipset could just dream about. Then he opened a trivial JPEG image with Qpeg and it showed on the screen almost instantly, while even my 68030-expanded A1200 needed a dozen of seconds or more. That's when I realized the sad truth: Amiga had some the ability to visually and musically outperform basic PC configurations and you needed to buy - at time - costy expansions to catch up and outperform Amiga custom chips. On the other hand, however, Amiga raw power wasn't just good enough: in order to meet and outperform a basic PC you had to buy very pricey expansion boards. In the end, a heavily expanded Amiga could be more expensive than a 'powerful enough' PC of a 2x factor. It was year 1994 or so.


Quote:

I do however have many 10-20 year old pcs (and newer) so thought "lets see how the AmigaOne and especially Sam systems compete". When put on a similar playing field (sata drives, radeon 9200, and other like for like comparisons) where does the "new" ppc Amiga stand. Over the next few weeks I'll be testing about half a dozen platforms on a few different OSes, using both "official" drivers and gallium/mesa. Hopefully this will give people a rough idea of what to expect, performance wise out of OS4 hardware, as well as maybe a few ideas of what to expect once gallium3d is available to OS4.

Please realize you've just opened the mythologic Pandora's box with this simple request. If you posted this very same question on a general IT/PC forum, you'd get just the answer you want. Here, you'll get just phylosophical answers about how a similar competition would be fair or not, with dozens of dinstinctions about how the benchmarking program has been compiled, wether it used this or that instruction sets/extensions, not counting the issues you might encounter with half supported or unsupported hardware. People posting bare benchmark results of SAMs and X1000 had been already silently killed and dissolved into acids.

@paolone

I don't think any Sam/X1000 owners are deluded into thinking their machines can compete on speed with even a budget PC.

But that's not the point. A 600Mhz Sam like mine can run AmigaOS 4 much better than a PC of any flavour, because a PC can't run AmigaOS 4 at all.

There's so much more to a computer than just how fast it is, at least for me... what's more important is how enjoyable it is to use.

@Spirantho

Surely the OS runs nice on such hardware. Running the OS is no end in itself. It indeed feels quick and one can do some useful things with such low end systems. But with rather little juice it is actually very limited on everyday and general usage. A computer that can not do the everyday tasks easily is of little worth. For me the computer is primarily not a hobby but a tool.
My weaker machines are collecting dust because they are so weak (400MHz 603e and 600 Mhz G3). I only use my 1,5 and 1.6 GHz G4 machines (Mac mini and powerbook) and even they are not as fast as I would like them to be (a G5 is to heavy for the livingroom unfortunately). But with at least that power they allow me to be almost "Amiga only" (use Windows and OS X pretty rarely). With more power it would be even more easy to be Amiga only.

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

@paolone

If your friend in 94 had a 486 25mhz probably have really much money because it was an very hi end configuration, compared the low end 030 (28mhz hardital?) board.
I had an 1995 Mteck and my friend at home all use a 386 pc vga and a1200 can fight with this machine without problems :)

with a 486 25mhz you had to compare the 040 25mhz ;)

In any way the history will not change because of this .

About PowerPc architecture :

Check this video:

_________________
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

Quote:

If your friend in 94 had a 486 25mhz probably have really much money because it was an very hi end configuration

Not that High-end configuration.

In June 1994:
486SX 33 MHz, 4 MB RAM, 130 MB HDD, 1.44 FDD, VGA 512 kB, 14" CRT
39500 CZK (cca 1580 USD in then money) - A1200 with B1230, RAM and Multiscan monitor was for the same (or even more money).

Configurations under 1000 USD used 386XS/DX CPUs up to 40 MHz.

Between 1994 and 1995 there was big leap from 386DX to 486DX/2 (performance quadrupled) - all under 1000 USD for entire computer with display. 68k was no longer competitive.