Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
5764 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
Channel: #Amigaworld
Channel Policy and Guidelines

(Uses JAVA Applet and Port 1024)
Visit the Chatroom Website

Who's Online
 60 guest(s) on-line.
 0 member(s) on-line.



You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 eliyahu:  34 mins ago
 Kremlar:  42 mins ago
 Rob:  1 hr 9 mins ago
 IRTheBorg:  1 hr 13 mins ago
 Wumpus:  1 hr 13 mins ago
 apsturk:  1 hr 25 mins ago
 BigD:  1 hr 40 mins ago
 matthey:  2 hrs 26 mins ago
 wawa:  2 hrs 33 mins ago
 OlafS25:  2 hrs 37 mins ago

/  Forum Index
   /  Amiga OS4 Hardware
      /  Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
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
Spectre660 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 19-Mar-2016 11:09:18
#21 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 5-Jun-2005
Posts: 3686
From: Unknown

@pavlor

Booting from Hard drive :
U-boot prompt to Linux Login prompt is 40 seconds.
Login and system completely booted is 70 seconds .
So completely booted and ready to go in 70 second from U-boot prompt.


Quote:

pavlor wrote:
@Cool_amigaN

Quote:
My experience come from 2,5 months ago so things could have been improved but at that time I could not consider it even a toy.


There was some public presentation this year? Interesting.


Edit: I assume Linux booted from Micro SD card, right?

Last edited by Spectre660 on 19-Mar-2016 at 11:16 AM.

_________________

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
NutsAboutAmiga 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 19-Mar-2016 12:27:48
#22 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Jun-2004
Posts: 10881
From: Norway

@Rob

It sort of question that does, not have definitive answer.
Software that used Float can be any program.
Lets say if wont 25% of a length I use.

Part = length * 0.25f;

Now I'm using float math (FPU).

If I did:

part = (length * 25) / 100;

Now I'm using integer values, the math mostly gives the same result, but first code gives more precise value.

If I just found program and run it first part will run slow, and second part will just with any change in speed, however if you recompile the code for tabor the first one run just as fast.

So problem is fixable, but not ideal as was pointed out, it take a lot more work on developer to keep thing optimized for different CPU's, and as I pointed out this something I'm not willing to do.

Well and impact this might have is also hard to determine before you have test programs, because depends on how many double / floats operations are used, and if they are in a loop and where it is in the program.

And as most thing that use float is thing that related to mathematics, you can expect it to be a issue with games, music, video players, vector paint programs, and web browsers.

In many case you won't know there was anything wrong, it just run slower.
fewer FPS, or higher CPU load.

If you’re the type, that know how to use compiler and are willing build your own programs, then this problem is not that big, if your not then you need to wait for others rebuild programs for you.

And here is real issue once you have built the program for tabor, then don't expect the program work anywhere else.

Quote:
Next area is to try and determine what FPU software uses the unsupported instructions and what FPU software doesn't. Could a SnoopDos like reporting tool be written that simply detect when those instructions are used and reports back what task used those instructions? If so,


No SnoopDos won't work, you need to decompile the exec file and look for instructions Tabour do not have. Or ask the developer who compiled file if they compiled with tabor cpu flag or not.
The OS will know but won't report that to you, as they be emulated by the OS.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 19-Mar-2016 at 12:58 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 19-Mar-2016 at 12:48 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 19-Mar-2016 at 12:46 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 19-Mar-2016 at 12:39 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 19-Mar-2016 at 12:38 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 19-Mar-2016 at 12:30 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 19-Mar-2016 at 12:28 PM.

_________________
Please check out my software:
Excalibur, Basilisk 2, AmigaInputAnywhere.
LiveForIt-Music
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Massi 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 19-Mar-2016 13:02:43
#23 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 2-Feb-2011
Posts: 516
From: Rome, Italy

@NutsAboutAmiga

While I liked the design of the hardware of the X1000 (and don' t know much about the X5000), this Tabor here seems like a pathetic blunder at least because of the choice of its cpu.

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
NutsAboutAmiga 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 19-Mar-2016 13:04:57
#24 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Jun-2004
Posts: 10881
From: Norway

@pavlor

Quote:
or most emulators


Well mac emulators? They use 680x0 and do not need a FPU, the issue with Basilisk Is that JIT compiler from the latest EUAE-jit is not included. Not really a Tabor issue, or WinUAE issue for that matter.

Setup a bounty and maybe someone will do it.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 19-Mar-2016 at 03:45 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 19-Mar-2016 at 01:08 PM.

_________________
Please check out my software:
Excalibur, Basilisk 2, AmigaInputAnywhere.
LiveForIt-Music
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
NutsAboutAmiga 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 19-Mar-2016 13:13:09
#25 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Jun-2004
Posts: 10881
From: Norway

@Massi

It makes no sense unless you're trying get a CPU at discount price.

http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/throw+a+monkey+wrench+into

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 19-Mar-2016 at 01:20 PM.

_________________
Please check out my software:
Excalibur, Basilisk 2, AmigaInputAnywhere.
LiveForIt-Music
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Massi 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 19-Mar-2016 13:21:01
#26 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 2-Feb-2011
Posts: 516
From: Rome, Italy

@NutsAboutAmiga

Yes and unfortunately this is going to introduce more issues than benefits to OS4.

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
iggy 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 19-Mar-2016 13:39:42
#27 ]
Super Member
Joined: 20-Oct-2010
Posts: 1175
From: Bear, Delaware USA

@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:
unless you are yrying to get a CPU at a discount price


So if Tabor had not been designed quite a long time ago, we would have the advantage of being able to buy a T10XX CPU (64 bit with a standard fpu) instead of the P1022 (32 bit with a non standard fpu AND 200 MHz slower).

The price argument is not really valid.

I respect Trevor and Paul, but we were discussing this option when the X1000 was still current (and many of us rejected the use of that core back then).

Only the truly commited fan boys are up for this.
Have at it guys.

I will either pay nothing (as I already have G5 Macs) or pay more and get something more capable like the X5000.

Last edited by iggy on 19-Mar-2016 at 02:04 PM.
Last edited by iggy on 19-Mar-2016 at 01:40 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
pavlor 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 19-Mar-2016 13:59:08
#28 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 10-Jul-2005
Posts: 8784
From: Unknown

@iggy

Quote:
Only the truly commited fan boys are up for this.


This really depends on final price. 700 EUR for such board would be insane. 200-300 EUR bearable.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
iggy 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 19-Mar-2016 14:10:28
#29 ]
Super Member
Joined: 20-Oct-2010
Posts: 1175
From: Bear, Delaware USA

@pavlor

Quote:
200-300 euro


At the current exchange rate, that would make it appealing to US OS4 users.
I don't expect it to come in that cheap (the board(s) I was considering would have cost more).

But, Aeon could sell them in this range to mediate the bad press this board has received.

It wouldn't resolve the issues this design has though.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Massi 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 19-Mar-2016 14:53:10
#30 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 2-Feb-2011
Posts: 516
From: Rome, Italy

@pavlor

Quote:
This really depends on final price. 700 EUR for such board would be insane. 200-300 EUR bearable.


Announced fiasco anyway.

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Rob 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 19-Mar-2016 21:43:25
#31 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 20-Mar-2003
Posts: 5712
From: S.Wales

@TRIPOS

Please point me to the threads that discuss specific programs that will or won't be compatible with Tabor running OS4.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
pavlor 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 19-Mar-2016 21:52:50
#32 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 10-Jul-2005
Posts: 8784
From: Unknown

@Rob

Quote:
Please point me to the threads that discuss specific programs that will or won't be compatible with Tabor running OS4.


Specific programs?

We just saw Tabor with bare Kickstart screen and you want full compatibility report!


We can assume most software will work, but some programs will be slow. How slow (or sloooooow ) depends on used FPU emulation.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
iggy 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 19-Mar-2016 22:19:26
#33 ]
Super Member
Joined: 20-Oct-2010
Posts: 1175
From: Bear, Delaware USA

@pavlor

We have not seen fpu emulation in action yet, but even the developers admit the initial package will be quite slow.
Doesn't it seem strange emulating part of the cpu already?

Why not just carry this to the next logical step and emulate the whole cpu?
A multicore X64 @ 3.2-4.0 GHz should have no problem matching a 1.2 GHz e500 (and greatly exceeding it in native code).

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
pavlor 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 19-Mar-2016 22:54:09
#34 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 10-Jul-2005
Posts: 8784
From: Unknown

@iggy

Quote:
A multicore X64 @ 3.2-4.0 GHz should have no problem matching a 1.2 GHz e500 (and greatly exceeding it in native code).


Who will write such emulation? QEMU doesn´t even reach half of that. Other solutions are incomplete (SheepShaver) or hard to base own code upon (PearPC).

Tabor is not the first board without FPU to run OS4 - do you remeber IBM eLAP?

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Rob 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 19-Mar-2016 23:59:30
#35 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 20-Mar-2003
Posts: 5712
From: S.Wales

@pavlor

I wanted a discussion on what the real world impact of running OS4 on Tabor, with it's FPU that is not fully compatible, might be.

According to the reply TMHG this discussion has already taken place previously (I know it hasn't really) so I was simply asking him to point me in the direction of said discussion.

I'm fully aware of the current state of porting OS4 to Tabor so I wouldn't expect some kind of report from the developers, they don't do that kind of thing anyway.

If we at least identify code that doesn't the FPU we can get a rough idea of how useful it will be even if the FPU performance completely sucks.

People wanting to buy one will want to know if it can be used for browsing the web, email, run system friendly 68k apps, etc.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
NutsAboutAmiga 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 20-Mar-2016 0:55:20
#36 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Jun-2004
Posts: 10881
From: Norway

@Rob

And it has been debated before.

http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=40622&forum=2&start=0&viewmode=flat&order=0

And we won't know fully how this will effect things before we see it running.
But any if you have the skills to recompile things, the FPU thing is less of a issue.

_________________
Please check out my software:
Excalibur, Basilisk 2, AmigaInputAnywhere.
LiveForIt-Music
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
iggy 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 20-Mar-2016 2:30:58
#37 ]
Super Member
Joined: 20-Oct-2010
Posts: 1175
From: Bear, Delaware USA

@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:
if you have the skills to recompile


So we will need seperate versions for Tabor and all other systems?
Or rely on trapping and emulation.
Pretty much what we have been discussing since this board was announced.

It doesn't sound better with repetition.
Hopefully some newer programs will test for which fpu is present and use alternate code paths for either floating point unit.

I'm not prepared to compile code just to deal with this.
After all, we aren't using Linux.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Massi 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 20-Mar-2016 9:25:01
#38 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 2-Feb-2011
Posts: 516
From: Rome, Italy

@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:
But any if you have the skills to recompile things, the FPU thing is less of a issue.


This is totally ridiculous, as not all users are necessarily developers and I guess the majority of people here have no idea about what a compiler is and what is for.
Moreover not all software is distributed with its source code, so what you recompile in this case? And where the source code is provided, very likely specific changes to makefiles are needed.

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Tomppeli 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 20-Mar-2016 15:09:28
#39 ]
Super Member
Joined: 18-Jun-2004
Posts: 1628
From: Home land of Santa, sauna, sisu and salmiakki

So making multiple versions of software is a no go somehow suddenly ?! We had separate versions of a piece of software for 68000, 68020, 68030, 68040 and 68060 in the same archive in the past. Like you have now non-altivec and altivec versions of, for example, MPlayer and ffmpeg.

_________________
Rock lobster bit me, so excuse me. If you'll plan to deal with me, be serious !
X1000 + AmigaOS4.1 FE. Be authentic.
"Anyone can build a fast CPU. The trick is to build a fast system." -Seymour Cray

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Spectre660 
Re: Tabor. Let's have a worhwhile discussion about it.
Posted on 20-Mar-2016 15:25:40
#40 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 5-Jun-2005
Posts: 3686
From: Unknown

Test post from Tabor using Qupzilla webbrowser runing under Ubuntu Mate 16.04 regular powerpc32 version. So everything done using emulated floating point.
No problems browsing.
MP3 Playing ok using mpv player .
Opening Libreoffice.
No problem there.
Viewing and zooming screen shot image. No problem there either .



_________________

 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 © 2000 - 2017 Amigaworld.net.

Amigaworld.net was originally founded by David Doyle