Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
6044 members 
Amiga Q&A /  Free for All /  Emulation /  Gaming / (Latest Posts)
Login

Nickname

Password

Lost Password?

Don't have an account yet?
Register now!

Support Amigaworld.net
Your support is needed and is appreciated as Amigaworld.net is primarily dependent upon the support of its users.
Donate

Menu
Main sections
Home
Features
News
Forums
Classifieds
Links
Downloads
Extras
OS4 Zone
IRC Network
AmigaWorld Radio
Newsfeed
Top Members
Amiga Dealers
Information
About Us
FAQs
Advertise
Polls
Terms of Service
Search

IRC Channel
Server: irc.amigaworld.net
Ports: 1024,5555, 6665-6669
SSL port: 6697
Channel: #Amigaworld
Channel Policy and Guidelines

Who's Online
25 crawler(s) on-line.
 20 guest(s) on-line.
 0 member(s) on-line.



You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 deadduckni:  7 mins ago
 Trekiej:  7 mins ago
 Karlos:  12 mins ago
 nbache:  22 mins ago
 kiFla:  25 mins ago
 cdimauro:  32 mins ago
 BigD:  47 mins ago
 zipper:  53 mins ago
 Rob:  1 hr 19 mins ago
 utri007:  1 hr 50 mins ago

/  Forum Index
   /  Amiga OS4 Hardware
      /  OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Register To Post

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 Next Page )
PosterThread
COBRA 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 19-Feb-2009 15:07:35
#261 ]
Super Member
Joined: 26-Apr-2004
Posts: 1809
From: Auckland, New Zealand

@Fab

Quote:
I'm not really sure glquake or quake2 OS4 ports work with OS4Emu. But i'll see.


If you could give it a try, I thank you, if they don't work, don't worry about it, I'm sure I'll have a look at these things at some stage (after setting up MOS on my Peg2), I'm just too occupied with other things at the moment, I didn't even have time last night to do that AVI test with the fixed IDE driver.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Seiya 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 19-Feb-2009 16:11:27
#262 ]
Super Member
Joined: 19-Aug-2006
Posts: 1424
From: Italia

sorry

this is the link for my test

A1 vs Peg vs Amithlon and in some case vs 68k Amigas

http://xoomer.virgilio.it/tuxcam/bench/result.html

_________________

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Wishmaster 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 19-Feb-2009 16:23:15
#263 ]
Member
Joined: 4-May-2003
Posts: 44
From: Unknown

aha

Last edited by Wishmaster on 19-Feb-2009 at 04:24 PM.
Last edited by Wishmaster on 19-Feb-2009 at 04:23 PM.

_________________
Pegasos PPC with MorphOS

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
pavlor 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 19-Feb-2009 16:47:19
#264 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 10-Jul-2005
Posts: 9370
From: Unknown

@Seiya

Wow! Your 68k machine is faaaast!!

Even faster than Core 2 Quad Q6600 2400 MHz WinUAE box of my brother!
My RC5 68k result is about 1,900,000.00 keys/sec (you have more than 3,000,000.00 on AMD Athlon XP - Core 2 should be more than 2 times faster).

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
wegster 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 19-Feb-2009 18:09:21
#265 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Nov-2004
Posts: 8554
From: RTP, NC USA

@Seiya

This looks like total 'selective data.' Plus:
1. A1/OS4 wasn't tested except for a small handful of cases. WHY?
2. No links to source of the programs used, nor params, are mentioned.
3. No system configuration data is given (clean boot, no WBStartup, vs 'any old apps running,' etc )
4. dnetc certainly runs on A1/OS4, and with JIT - why nothing there?
5. Some of your tests are obviously done with JIT disabled. (or not done at all) Why?

Incomplete data with benchmarks or only 'selective results' really isn't of much *real* use.
Can you answer the above or clarify?

_________________
Are we not done with the same silly arguments and flames yet??!

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
COBRA 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 19-Feb-2009 20:10:30
#266 ]
Super Member
Joined: 26-Apr-2004
Posts: 1809
From: Auckland, New Zealand

@jahc

Quote:

jahc wrote:
Cobra, can you download that test video clip from Fab's site
http://fabportnawak.free.fr/benchmark.avi
and then test Dvplayer with the fixed Peg2 ide driver?


Here it is (finally):

6.Dev:dvplayer> DvPlayer_0.65 noaudio noskip notriplebuffer verbose Media:benchmark.avi
Video: AVI, 1024 x 576, 40.00 fps
Audio: 01 [MP3] 16-bit 44100 Hz, Stereo
Total Nr of Frames: 4002
Nr of Frames played: 3937
Nr of Frames skipped: 65 (2%)
Total Playback Time: 122.357 seconds
Average Framerate: 32.708 fps
Displayed Framerate: 32.176 fps

Note that I used 'notriplebuffer' because otherwise the vsync'ing will make the results depend on your monitor's vertical frequency, without that option here I get 124 seconds.

EDIT: Some frames are skipped because the video decoder finds some frames corrupted and is unable to decode them.

Last edited by COBRA on 20-Feb-2009 at 11:00 AM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
rzookol 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 19-Feb-2009 21:50:03
#267 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 4-Oct-2005
Posts: 284
From: Poland, Lublin

@COBRA

Quote:
6.Dev:dvplayer> DvPlayer_0.65 noaudio ___noskip___ notriplebuffer verbose Media:benchmark.avi


Quote:
Nr of Frames skipped: 65 (2%)


hmmm ?

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
COBRA 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 19-Feb-2009 22:10:12
#268 ]
Super Member
Joined: 26-Apr-2004
Posts: 1809
From: Auckland, New Zealand

@rzookol

The file is a bit corrupted, so the decoder skips some frames it's unable to decode (mplayer's verbose output shows a lot of errors too)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Seiya 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 19-Feb-2009 23:33:34
#269 ]
Super Member
Joined: 19-Aug-2006
Posts: 1424
From: Italia

Quote:

wegster wrote:
@Seiya

This looks like total 'selective data.' Plus:
1. A1/OS4 wasn't tested except for a small handful of cases. WHY?
2. No links to source of the programs used, nor params, are mentioned.
3. No system configuration data is given (clean boot, no WBStartup, vs 'any old apps running,' etc )
4. dnetc certainly runs on A1/OS4, and with JIT - why nothing there?
5. Some of your tests are obviously done with JIT disabled. (or not done at all) Why?

Incomplete data with benchmarks or only 'selective results' really isn't of much *real* use.
Can you answer the above or clarify?






yes :)
this test is made some years ago when i have asked to italian amiga community to make some benchmark within AmigaOne and Pegasos.

And then i have asked to make a 68k benchmark on OS4, MorphOS to compare with Amithlon.

the benchmark file i used is here.

A1/OS4 wasn't full tested because in italy for my experience, not all amiga users like very much made a benchmark.

you have to consider these test like a first OS4 and MOS benchmark when OS4 was born and the first test against MorphOS.

we say that this bench is an amithlon bench vesersu A1 and MOS,
only few users has acepted to make these test and i thanks again these people
benchmarking with 68k test againt amithlon has bring to us a first duel within OS4 and MOS with they limit siince that time.

after, when OS4 and MOS was more mature, i hope to have more modern test, but amiga community has a strange relationship with benchmark.

The tests also try that Amitlhon was much faster than WinUAE and much faster (on 68k application) than OS4 and MOS.

i like to see now, a 68k bench with Sam440 and Efika wth my test.
it will be very interesting for me to see P2@350 with amithlon versus Sam and Efika.




_________________

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Seiya 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 19-Feb-2009 23:38:24
#270 ]
Super Member
Joined: 19-Aug-2006
Posts: 1424
From: Italia

@pavlor
Quote:

pavlor wrote:
@Seiya

Wow! Your 68k machine is faaaast!!

Even faster than Core 2 Quad Q6600 2400 MHz WinUAE box of my brother!
My RC5 68k result is about 1,900,000.00 keys/sec (you have more than 3,000,000.00 on AMD Athlon XP - Core 2 should be more than 2 times faster).


amithoni is much faster than winuae :)

_________________

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Frags 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 20-Feb-2009 1:12:07
#271 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 23-Nov-2004
Posts: 971
From: East-Midlands (Nottingham) UK

@thread

What I`m seeing here is that [anypc] + Amithlon outclasses all MOS/OS4 systems by such a ludicrous margin that one wonders why everyone isn`t using it.

_________________
Fraggle

- insert profound text here -

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hans 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 20-Feb-2009 1:17:05
#272 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 27-Dec-2003
Posts: 4939
From: New Zealand

@Seiya

Quote:


yes :)
this test is made some years ago when i have asked to italian amiga community to make some benchmark within AmigaOne and Pegasos.

So basically those benchmarks are missing results, and are for really old versions of OS4 and MorphOS. They don't tell us anything useful because we're interested in the performance of the current systems.

@all

As misleading as benchmarks are/can-be, they can be used to find bottlenecks. I'd be interested to see Fab's tests repeated with the fixed IDE driver. It would also be nice to see tests that don't involve OpenGL (we know the issues there) and/or old compiles of games/apps that don't take advantage of new features in Amiga OS 4.1.

Regarding new features, has Amiga OS 4.1's SDL port been updated to use the new compositing features when they're available (i.e., support hardware alpha blending)? If not, that's something that needs to be done.

Hans

_________________
http://hdrlab.org.nz/ - Amiga OS 4 projects, programming articles and more. Home of the RadeonHD driver for Amiga OS 4.x project.
https://keasigmadelta.com/ - More of my work.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
jahc 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 20-Feb-2009 2:04:20
#273 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-May-2003
Posts: 2959
From: Auckland, New Zealand

@Hans

Quote:
Regarding new features, has Amiga OS 4.1's SDL port been updated to use the new compositing features when they're available (i.e., support hardware alpha blending)? If not, that's something that needs to be done.

Does XMAME use alpha blending functions?

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hans 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 20-Feb-2009 2:14:49
#274 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 27-Dec-2003
Posts: 4939
From: New Zealand

@jahc

Quote:

jahc wrote:
@Hans

Quote:
Regarding new features, has Amiga OS 4.1's SDL port been updated to use the new compositing features when they're available (i.e., support hardware alpha blending)? If not, that's something that needs to be done.

Does XMAME use alpha blending functions?


No idea, but it was compiled back in 2005, so any improvements to OS4's SDL port since then won't be included.

Hans

_________________
http://hdrlab.org.nz/ - Amiga OS 4 projects, programming articles and more. Home of the RadeonHD driver for Amiga OS 4.x project.
https://keasigmadelta.com/ - More of my work.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
ikir 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 20-Feb-2009 8:12:56
#275 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 18-Dec-2002
Posts: 5647
From: Italy

@Glames

Compositing should be faster.

_________________
ikir

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
pavlor 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 20-Feb-2009 8:21:09
#276 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 10-Jul-2005
Posts: 9370
From: Unknown

@Seiya

Quote:
i like to see now, a 68k bench with Sam440 and Efika wth my test. it will be very interesting for me to see P2@350 with amithlon versus Sam and Efika.


In 2004, 68k benchmarks were useful (majority of used applications was 68k). Now, native benchmarks are needed for real comparision (WOS is not native). P2 350 MHz is as fast as 5200B in Efika, 440EP in SAM is two times faster than P2 350 MHz.

I will try your benchmarks on my brother´s PC and you can try The DOOM Benchmark, recent OGR (I don´t know why, but I think it is better for comparision than RC5) and some sort of Dhrystone 2.1 benchmark (I know it is old and outdated...).

Last edited by pavlor on 20-Feb-2009 at 08:35 AM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Varthall 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 20-Feb-2009 8:49:25
#277 ]
Super Member
Joined: 17-Feb-2004
Posts: 1555
From: Up Rough

@Hans

Quote:

Hans wrote:
Regarding new features, has Amiga OS 4.1's SDL port been updated to use the new compositing features when they're available (i.e., support hardware alpha blending)? If not, that's something that needs to be done.

I don't think so, the latest SDL is dated 30.01.2008, before OS4.1's release date. It would be indeed great to see SDL supporting the newest 4.1 features.

Varthall

_________________
AmigaOne XE - AmigaOS 4.1 - Freescale 7457 1GHz - 1GB ram
MPlayer for OS4: https://sourceforge.net/projects/mplayer-amigaos/

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Pecosbil 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 20-Feb-2009 9:13:20
#278 ]
Member
Joined: 11-Mar-2003
Posts: 79
From: Rovaniemi, Finland

@pavlor

Quote:
Wow! Your 68k machine is faaaast!!

Even faster than Core 2 Quad Q6600 2400 MHz WinUAE box of my brother!
My RC5 68k result is about 1,900,000.00 keys/sec (you have more than 3,000,000.00 on AMD Athlon XP - Core 2 should be more than 2 times faster).


There must be something wrong with your brother's WinUAE box. I just tested the latest m68k dnetc client on my WinUAE PC (Core 2 Duo E8400@4GHz) and it gave me 6,568,902 nodes/sec in OGR-NG and 6,357,450 keys/sec in RC5-72.

On the other hand, m68k Quake is more than 50% faster on that same setup when compared to the native PPC version on my Pegasos 2.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
ShInKurO 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 20-Feb-2009 9:13:53
#279 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 18-Jan-2004
Posts: 465
From: Italy

@KimmoK

Quote:

>Ambinet is open source, but depends heavily on MUI4. As long a sMUI4 is not available for OS4 it will require major changes.

Okey dokey. If AOS4 had MUI4, it would have had sputnik yesteryear. So clearly MUI4 is the bigger fish to catch. I would buy AOS4 version of MUI4 for 50, anyone else? :)


It was said that there is the first open source version of Ambient which depends of MUI3.9 to work on MorphOS, its source it's downloadable, and after a porting of these souces to OS4 we could merge to new Ambient version with svn and substitute MUI4 parts with proper MUI3.9 parts...it's not black magic if someone want port Ambient on OS4.
So first step is to port Ambient MUI3.9 on OS4, anyone who offer himself to this port?
Noooo MUI is evil!!!!111

Last edited by ShInKurO on 20-Feb-2009 at 09:18 AM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Zylesea 
Re: OS4 VS MorphOS on the same hardware
Posted on 20-Feb-2009 9:38:19
#280 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 16-Mar-2004
Posts: 2223
From: Ostwestfalen, FRG

@Hans
Quote:

Hans wrote:
@Seiya

[quote]



As misleading as benchmarks are/can-be, they can be used to find bottlenecks. I'd be interested to see Fab's tests repeated with the fixed IDE driver. It would also be nice to see tests that don't involve OpenGL (we know the issues there) and/or old compiles of games/apps that don't take advantage of new features in Amiga OS 4.1.

Hans


Well even with the ide bug included I doubt thet it takes that much time to read ~ 100 MB from the hd, nor that the PIO mode eats up all that cpu power. The PIO modes indeed slows down things, but I seriously doubt it is the only cause for the difference.

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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 Next Page )

[ home ][ about us ][ privacy ] [ forums ][ classifieds ] [ links ][ news archive ] [ link to us ][ user account ]
Copyright (C) 2000 - 2019 Amigaworld.net.
Amigaworld.net was originally founded by David Doyle