@cdimauro

Now comparison with native AMD64 dnetc client (v2.9111-520-CTR-13050820 for Win64):

OGR-NG 83,855,483 nodes/sec
RC5-72 11,278,341 keys/sec

So it is 1/17 to 1/4 of native performance. From my experience, OGR-NG scales with raw CPU performance, so overal emulated speed could be 1/17 of native performance.

Quote:

Maybe the FPU JIT isn't working properly.

Will try some FPU demanding benchmarks (eg. lame). HardInfo benchmarks I did in QEMU show surprisingly low FPU performance. It seems to be problem of PowerPC guest.

@tlosm

Quote:

run a timedemo with quake in 640x480 in software mode there are many porting for wos and ppc.library i can say the result compared with sam

Sorry, no Quake port works for me (there are some PowerPC emulation features still to be implemented in WinUAE). ADoomWOS also don´t run (was OK in PearPC based version). However, I´m able to run Heretic (will try benchmark later).

lame benchmark (lamewos-3.98.4) clearly shows FPU emulation is slow (result at 10 %):

0.13x (see Benchmarks time! thread for more info)
Final result: 0.1288x


For comparison:

SAM440flex 800MHz
2.9335x (post 28 in above mentioned thread)

WinUAE 1.5 on Core 2 Quad Q6600 2400 MHz
4.0742x (post 69)

WinUAE 2.x on Core i5-2500K 3.3 GHz
7.8558x (New PowerPC roadmap and Power8 roadmap post 403)

Edit: Final lame result

Last edited by pavlor on 11-Sep-2014 at 05:15 PM.

@pavlor

You can benchmark with mplayer, ragemem, lame.

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

@NutsAboutAmiga

I don´t have OS4 (yet...).

MPlayer can´t be used for benchmarking on OS3 (too old, too buggy). For lame benchmark see above.

I was able to run Doom Benchmark with these settings:
ADoomWOS -chunkyppc -nosfx -forcedemo demo3

Result:
2134 gametics in 475 realtics (comparable to 157 FPS)


Edit: Note - all on AGA, RTG will be probably faster.
For comparison:
Same configuration (but on WinUAE 2.4.1)
68040 JIT, AGA, ADoom 1.3 - 1322 realtics (56.7 FPS)
68040 JIT, RTG (UAEGFX), ADoom 1.3 - 110 realtics (679.0 FPS)

Edit2: Now on RTG (Picasso IV) - WinUAE 2.9.0Beta15
68040 JIT, RTG (PicassoIV), ADoom 1.3 - 154 realtics (485.0 FPS)
QEMU PPC (68040 JIT), RTG (PicassoIV), ADoom 1.7 (WOS) - 299 realtics (249.8 FPS)

ADoomWOS is faster with 68040 JIT (Picasso96 runs on 68k CPU)

Last edited by pavlor on 11-Sep-2014 at 08:30 PM.
Last edited by pavlor on 11-Sep-2014 at 07:25 PM.

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Now comparison with native AMD64 dnetc client (v2.9111-520-CTR-13050820 for Win64): OGR-NG 83,855,483 nodes/sec RC5-72 11,278,341 keys/sec So it is 1/17 to 1/4 of native performance. From my experience, OGR-NG scales with raw CPU performance, so overal emulated speed could be 1/17 of native performance.

1/17 is the worst case. And you're still using WinUAE & QEMU for x86, whereas the dnetc client was for Win64. So, I really think that there's a lot of room for improvements.
Quote:

Quote: Maybe the FPU JIT isn't working properly. Will try some FPU demanding benchmarks (eg. lame). HardInfo benchmarks I did in QEMU show surprisingly low FPU performance. It seems to be problem of PowerPC guest.

Don't use synthetic benchmarks. Lame is a good benchmark, because it has very low I/O and stresses a lot the CPU (especially the FPU) doing some really useful task.

Quote:

pavlor wrote: lame benchmark (lamewos-3.98.4) clearly shows FPU emulation is slow (result at 10 %): 0.13x (see Benchmarks time! thread for more info) Final result: 0.1288x For comparison: SAM440flex 800MHz 2.9335x (post 28 in above mentioned thread) WinUAE 1.5 on Core 2 Quad Q6600 2400 MHz 4.0742x (post 69) WinUAE 2.x on Core i5-2500K 3.3 GHz 7.8558x (New PowerPC roadmap and Power8 roadmap post 403) Edit: Final lame result

So, my first impression is verified: the FPU has some issue, which has to be fixed. But there's time for it: now it's important to have a correct emulation, which is missing.

Anyway, I'm pretty curious regarding how the JIT works for the FPU. The performance is so slow, that maybe there's not JIT used for the FPU.

Altivec is another unknown area, but it's not that much used and can be postponed currently.

Quote:

pavlor wrote: I was able to run Doom Benchmark with these settings: ADoomWOS -chunkyppc -nosfx -forcedemo demo3 Result: 2134 gametics in 475 realtics (comparable to 157 FPS) Edit: Note - all on AGA, RTG will be probably faster. For comparison: Same configuration 68040 JIT, AGA, ADoom 1.3 - 1322 realtics (56.7 FPS) 68040 JIT, RTG, ADoom 1.3 - 110 realtics (679.0 FPS)

Don't loose time for AGA. PowerPC machines have no AGA, but only RTG.

Have you some data about ADoom 1.3 running on some PowerPC machine?

@cdimauro

Quote:

Have you some data about ADoom 1.3 running on some PowerPC machine?

Yes.

Amiga 1200T, BlizzardPPC (68060 50 MHz) 603e 150 MHz, Voodoo 3, 256 MB RAM, AmigaOS 3.9 BB2; ADoomPPC 1.3?; by ddni; 2518 realtics, 29.6 FPS

Amiga 3000, Cyberstorm PPC604 (68060 60 MHz) 604e 233 MHz, VooDoo3/2000, 144? MB RAM Fast; ADoom?; by reKTor; 1323 realtics, 56.5 FPS

AmigaOne XE/G4, MPC7457 @ 1000Mhz 512K level 2 cache, Sapphire Radeon 9200 256MB*, 1GB Micron registered PC133, Amiga OS 4.1. ;WOS ADoomPPC 1.7; by Rob; 175 realtics, 426.8 FPS


Note: ADoom 1.3 is 68k version I use for benchmarking (there is newer 1.4, but I rather stay with proven 1.3)

@pavlor: I'm impressed by the results, but the problem with the last one is that you haven't used the same ADoom version, so it's not possible to directly compare the numbers.

Have you the possibility to run WOS ADoomPPC 1.7 on WinUAE/QEMU? It'll be very interesting.

@cdimauro

ADoomPPC 1.7 is latest WOS version - I used it for benchmarking. Last result is directly comparable to my own results. WarpOS wrapper was used on OS4 to run ADoomPPC 1.7, there are even better results on MorphOS with same binary (WarpOS wrapper seems to be faster in MorphOS than in case of OS4):

Pegasos2 G4, 7447 1000 MHz, Radeon 9250, 1 GB RAM, MorphOS 2.1. ;WOS ADoomPPC 1.7; byLuky; 97 realtics 770.0 FPS.

@pavlor: OK, so compared to AmigaOne XE/G4, MPC7457 @ 1000Mhz on OS4.1 with WinUAE/QEMU the result is like having the same system but running at 1591Mhz.

Compared to Pegasos2 G4, 7447 1000 MHz on MorphOS 2.1, it's like having the same system but running at 882Mhz.

I think that it speaks by itself.

The good thing is that Doom uses mostly fixed point numbers for calculations, so it's bound to the CPU and not to the FPU. That's why you got so much good numbers, which clearly show that the "integer" performance of WinUAE/QEMU is more than that acceptable.

@cdimauro
Quote:

Don't loose time for AGA. PowerPC machines have no AGA, but only RTG.

You can use CyberstormPPC and BlizzardPPC without any graphics card.

Actually I used my BlizzardPPC for some time using only AGA because BVisions were not out yet.

Last edited by Ancalimon on 14-Sep-2014 at 01:18 AM.

@cdimauro

Quote:

Compared to Pegasos2 G4, 7447 1000 MHz on MorphOS 2.1, it's like having the same system but running at 882Mhz.

Lower realtics means better result (more FPS), so it is rather:

585 MHz in comparison to A1/G4-1000 (175 vs 299 realtics)
324 MHz in comparison to Peg2/G4-1000 (97 vs 299 realtics)

Doom Benchmark stresses both integer and 2D performance (so speed of 2D is also important).

Quote:

which clearly show that the "integer" performance of WinUAE/QEMU is more than that acceptable

Without doubt.

QEMU PPC uses for FPU softfloat library = all FPU operations are done in software.

And a first 64bits version stable with JIT support to next step the PPC emulation on the 64 bits version to get a fast emulator in the current x86-64bits machines?

Quote:

Ancalimon wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Don't loose time for AGA. PowerPC machines have no AGA, but only RTG. You can use CyberstormPPC and BlizzardPPC without any graphics card. Actually I used my BlizzardPPC for some time using only AGA because BVisions were not out yet.

Yes, but if the AmigaOS4 programs use RTG, it's better to test WinUAE + PowerPC with an RTG configuration.

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Compared to Pegasos2 G4, 7447 1000 MHz on MorphOS 2.1, it's like having the same system but running at 882Mhz. Lower realtics means better result (more FPS), so it is rather: 585 MHz in comparison to A1/G4-1000 (175 vs 299 realtics) 324 MHz in comparison to Peg2/G4-1000 (97 vs 299 realtics)

Are "realtics" purely related to the CPU (e.g. crude processor emulation)?

Quote:

Doom Benchmark stresses both integer and 2D performance (so speed of 2D is also important).

That's why I think it's better to look at the FPS results and not only to the realtics. In the end, the FPSes are what comes out from the whole emulation, and that's what both AmigaOnes and WinUAE users will get. IMO.

Quote:

pavlor wrote: QEMU PPC uses for FPU softfloat library = all FPU operations are done in software.

That explains everything. So no FPU JIT is working.

Here there's A LOT of improvements that are possible. First, a PowerPC -> x87 is possible. Then an SSE2 one. And finally an AVX one will explode the FPU performance.

Unfortunately, it requires a lot of work & testing too.

Quote:

Templario wrote: And a first 64bits version stable with JIT support to next step the PPC emulation on the 64 bits version to get a fast emulator in the current x86-64bits machines?

You have to ask to Toni.

I think that QEMU already supports x64, so it should be easy to have the new PowerPC -> x64 JIT working (and showing improved performances). But WinUAE x64 is currently not a mature product.

@cdimauro

Quote:

That's why I think it's better to look at the FPS results and not only to the realtics.

Both numbers are fully comparable:

FPS = 35*gameticks/realticks

(gametics = 2134 in case of demo3)

I've been a long time AmigaOS 4.x user since I got my micro-A1 in 2004.
However, it's been sitting gathering dust for the past 7-8 years.

I purchased AmigaOS 4.1 Classic as soon as I was aware of this exciting development
of WinUAE. In the first betas everything was very slow and practically unusable for
anything.

Now with the latest beta 16 (with PPC JIT suupport) it feels about as snappy as my
old Micro-A1! It's fantastic! However, I haven't tried any programs other than the OS
stuff. And I must say it's stable I'm amazed at how fast Toni Wilen has managed to
make such speedy progress in just a couple of weeks.

Best regards
Kotler

Last edited by Kotler on 16-Sep-2014 at 02:24 PM.

Quote:

I purchased AmigaOS 4.1 Classic as soon as I was aware of this exciting development of WinUAE. In the first betas everything was very slow and practically unusable for anything. Now with the latest beta 16 (with PPC JIT suupport) it feels about as snappy as my old Micro-A1! It's fantastic! However, I haven't tried any programs other than the OS stuff. And I must say it's stable I'm amazed at how fast Toni Wilen has managed to make such speedy progress in just a couple of weeks.

And that, I think, is really where the rubber meets the road. It is the boilerplate endorsement that people need to see. Toni has made quantum leaps in the last few weeks, and here we have one person posting that they bought OS4.1 just because they could run it on WinUAE. I don't think it's overstating the case to suggest that this could "grow" the OS4 userbase beyond the piddling sales of custom PPC hardware.

_________________
The problem with AmigaOS on PPC isn't that PPC is big-endian. The problem with AmigaOS on PPC is that PPC is dead-endian.

@TheDungeonDelver
He is a OS4 user already, no new one ; )
So license go up but not the number of users. They need to reduce the price for the classic version.

I would buy a bunch of licenses to use with my Ares Computers.

_________________
AROS Broadway - AEROS - Aminux - AmiCloud - indieGO! Appstore - AmiWallet - VAN lossless video codec - AMC Amiga media Center -KrypUnite - LibertyNet - MinX - amigaNX