@ppcamiga1

Why do you set the rules? Market set the rules, and it is shown that people want emu68 as their cpu and all the hardware expansion that come with it. Pistorm has issues? It has, but 040 had issues, 060 had issues, blizzard ppc more even so, still all of them allowes you to get a massive poll of amiga software which seems that it is what people care. You like booting AmigaOS 4 and open drawers, be my guest, to each its own I guess.

_________________
Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home.
The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga

@ppcamiga1

If you want a high end 68K experience, you don't have to use a 68060+PCI. Available options begin with emulation on hardware you already own, costing you basically nothing.

And if you already have an Amiga, a Pistorm replaces almost anything you would have got the PCI slots for as well as giving you a shockingly fast 68040 compatible CPU.

As for PS level 1 graphics, I already had better than that with the RTG system I had: 8MB 64-bit memory, 230MHz RAMDAC, Up to 32-bits per pixel 3D rasterization with ZBuffer, Texturing, Shading, Fogging etc. You're so full of sh1t you don't even know what the original 68K/RTG systems were capable of back then. Honestly, it's laughable.

Last edited by Karlos on 16-Jan-2025 at 07:40 PM.
Last edited by Karlos on 16-Jan-2025 at 07:40 PM.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@Hammer

Quote:

HAM8 is not slow when coupled with a fast enough CPU. https://youtu.be/wbWGAFIkA5E Quests Of Nargoth with AGA HAM8 example. I ran this incomplete game on a real C= A1200 with PiStorm32/EMu68/RPi CM4 and it was pretty smooth with AGA's HAM8 display.

Calling it fast, that is exaggeration, AGA chipset still needs 2 clocks to complete single CPU access just like OCS/ECS.

One thing to notice the lowres resolution, and small part of actual screen used for 3D.
and horrible VHS quality, 15bit graphics is a lot better than HAM8.

to explain some of speed, you do not need to update all the plains, you only need to update some of bits, 2 bits are channel select, or mode select, so only 6 bits can be updated, the high bits must be updated, and the low bits are more optional. Depending on the image quality you want.

One bit per channel you know that’s 4 different RGB colors.
Two bit per channel you have 64 different RGB colors.
Tree bit per channel you have 512 different RGB colors.
Fore bit per channel you have 4096 different RGB colors.

The bits are also number of plains you need to update, (as on Amiga bits are stacked in plains), my guess 512 different RGB color be just about right, for simple game.
3 pixels has to be written for etch channel, so you talking about 2*3=6, 3*3 = 9 or 4*3=12 write per RGB color. Of course its more complicated then that, as bit has packed into bytes or words, before written to the chip ram.

On 15bit/16bit graphics you only need ONE single 16bit write.

I’m sure you can speed up HAM8 with some lookup table magic or something, to cut down on the writes. But the problem is that you have 3 color channels, and you can’t divide 8, 16, or 32 by 3. It’s not even 64,128,256,512,1024,2048 and so on, it does fit so well with a lookup table. Its makes it difficult to do it on a real 680x0 CPU.

but as you say the main problem is calculation speed, so doing it on ARM cpu in ARM’s system memory, before writing it to chip, should help. But that has nothing to do with real Amiga hardware or bus speeds.

It’s technically complicated for no gain, and complexity normally results in poor performance, low quality, and poor resolution. And to be frankly it’s not interesting that you can do it on a fast CPU.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 17-Jan-2025 at 07:45 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 16-Jan-2025 at 08:21 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 16-Jan-2025 at 08:15 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 16-Jan-2025 at 08:11 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 16-Jan-2025 at 08:10 PM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 16-Jan-2025 at 08:02 PM.

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

agami Quote:

But it is at least twice as expensive as a cheap Gaming PC from 2024: - with multi-core and multi-threading support, - PCIe 4.0 and 5.0, - DDR4/DDR5 RAM support, - NVMe SSD support, - 1GbE and 2.5GbE networking, - Wi-Fi 6 or faster, - Bluetooth, - also available in portable (laptop/notebook) form-factor, - plays all the late '90s and early 2000s 3D games, plus all Amiga 68k software via UAE, - plays all modern 3D gaming titles, - has modern web browsers which work on all websites, and - many options for free/open-source operating systems and software. Supports programing in C, Objective-C, C++, C#, Python, endless parade of Javascript frameworks, PHP, Ruby, Rust, etc. Not that it matters because you're not a programmer.

You start to reveal the absurdity of PPC hardware and it will only get worse as there is no new PPC silicon or technology. Considering performance, technology and price, PPC hardware offers a tiny fraction of the value of even RPi hardware. PPC hardware is more outdated now that 68k hardware was when Amiga1 hardware tried to replace it circa 2002.

minator Quote:

You're trying to convince me CISC is better based on a benchmark no one in the desktop space has used in decades? Seriously? Not to mention, you've listed all sorts of different processors designed for different purposes at different times, prices and power points.

The point was to show the importance of technology advancement especially the chip fab process. Newer technology offers a huge advantage. The electrical signal velocity through wires has not changed much but the distance signals have to travel has changed a huge amount. Compared to a mostly modern 5nm chip process, the X5000 and A1222 CPU electrical signals have to travel ~9 times as far and the 68060 electrical signals have to travel ~100 times as far. How many races are you going to win where you have to travel even 9 times as far as your opponent?

minator Quote:

Could it be that if you use a benchmark actually used today it might tell a different story? If you run Geekbench, the A76 SoC quite throughly beats the i7 920.

Actually, the Intel Core i7-920 outperforms the RPi 5 with Cortex-A76 cores in the Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark.

https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-raspberry_pi_5_b_broadcom_bcm2712-vs-intel_core_i7_920

The Cortex-A76 outperforms in the single core Geekbench benchmark but the Core i7-920 design chose to use multi-threading which reduces single core performance and the design likely used power reducing compromises to keep the power reasonable on 2008 silicon, which is actually more than 15 years old. By 2010 15 years ago, the 32nm Core i7-970 was released.

https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-raspberry_pi_5_b_broadcom_bcm2712-vs-intel_core_i7_970

The Core i7-970 electrical signals only have to travel roughly twice as far as the Cortex-A76 cores now, still a huge disadvantage. The multi-core performance is perhaps a bit like a relay race but it is still impressive that relay runners could outperform a single runner when the distance is doubled for the relay runners. The Core i7-970 is far from a slouch in single core performance too as it narrowly outperforms the RPi 5 Cortex-A76 in Geekbench 5 single-core performance. My original claim was that the RPi 5 CPU performance was about that of a 15 year old PC and I understand the huge CPU technology advantage of the RPi 5.

The most powerful CPU cores will fall to weaker cores on newer silicon. It is especially bad when in-order CPU cores start to outperform OoO CPU cores on old silicon because in-order cores are usually much smaller and lower cost. The OoO Cortex-A57 uses about 6 times as many transistors as the companion in-order Cortex-A53 and the difference has likely grown with newer ARM cores. Even disappointing performance in-order ARM cores on newer silicon are outperforming the most powerful OoO PPC cores ever with the cost dropping to a fraction of PPC CPU costs. Staying with commodity PPC CPUs would likely mean costs would start to increase too like the old 68060 and 68040 chips. The in-order 68060 had better performance efficiency than the OoO PPC601 and PPC PPC603 and even the die shrunk PPC603e with double the caches of the 68060 but even if the 68060 had been clocked up as planned utilizing the deep at that time 8-stage pipeline, the 68060 would have fallen behind after a few die shrinks too. The PPC603e 1.4 DMIPS/MHz improved to 1.9 DMIPS/MHz finally surpassing the 500nm 68060 silicon at 90nm with the e300 core in the Efika SoC which documentation of the specifications state is a "603e Prozzessor core (e300)".

https://www.bplan-gmbh.de/efika-en.html Quote:

Freescale MPC5200B PowerPC SoC 400MHz 32 bit PowerPC including FPU 603e Prozzessor core (e300) 760 Dhrystone, 2.1 MIPS

The low power OoO PPC603 was the foundation of the PPC750 (G3) which started at 2.3 DMIPS/MHz but it had many improvements. The PPC603 had poor performance with minimal caches, only one simple integer unit and tiny OoO queues but was much better with more caches, a 2nd integer unit and large OoO queues. The increased caches and OoO queues are SRAM and increase the size of cores quickly though. The power and core size are why G3 architects started with the PPC603 instead of higher performance PPC604 design.

minator Quote:

Not only that: The i7 uses 130 Watts. The A76 SoC uses 12 Watts.

The original 68040@33MHz (800nm) dissipated 4.1-5.8 Watts typical and 6.2-8.0 Watts worst case. There was a 68040 die shrink to 650nm and then the 68040V with a die shrink to 500nm dissipating 1.5 Watts typical and 2 Watts worst case. The difference is between a nearly intolerable desktop chip with expensive cooling and a mobile chip or embedded chip using passive cooling. There are more die shrinks from the Core i7-920 to the RPi 5 Cortex-A76 than from the 68040 to the 68040V. The 68040 reduced the voltage from 5V to 3.3V resulting in much of the gain but that is possible because of and often part of die shrinks. The shorter wire distances reduce the transmission loss.

minator Quote:

Other than areas with a large legacy software base (i.e. Mainframes and PCs) Nobody else uses CISC. If it's so great, why is there is no CISC IV? Why are there no CISC GPUs?

CISC cores are more difficult to develop, x86(-64) has given CISC a bad reputation and nobody wants to compete with the capital intensive OoO strongholds of Intel and AMD. Most so called RISC cores are actually hybrid cores with load/store memory accesses the only RISC feature/pillar/philosophy that has not been abandoned to improve performance and perhaps it should. CISC cores have very high performance potential despite your criticism of CISC features some of which are handicaps but mostly minimized. Any handicap the 68k has was worse on x86 and was unable to stop it from dominating the high performance desktop, server/workstation and gaming markets. The x86(-64) ISAs poorly scale down to in-order superscalar CPUs though where the 68060 was powerful, efficient and successful before Motorola decided to replace it with PPC giving up the embedded market in the process.

Last edited by matthey on 16-Jan-2025 at 09:28 PM.

@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:

Calling it fast, that is exaggeration, AGA chipset still needs 2 clocks to complete single CPU access just like OCS/ECS.

AGA follows A3000's CPU 32bit Chip RAM access i.e. 7.1 MB/s.

A500/A2000's OCS/ECS has 3.5 MB/s 16-bit Chip RAM access for the CPU.

When there's sufficient CPU power, AGA's 8bit planes allows Quake demo1 for
~62 fps Quake at 320x200p e.g. https://youtu.be/ZG2dC_JD81Y?t=183
~31 fps Quake at 640x200p

That's pushing the limit for a 15 kHz NTSC TV.

Using HAM6 with sufficient CPU power, the A500 version has ~25fps Quake at 320x200p. There's a limitation with the original PiStorm, which needs to be replaced by a slightly faster PiStorm16.

_________________
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32/RPi CM4/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 4B/Emu68)
Ryzen 9 7950X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

@ppcamiga1

Quote:

ppcamiga1 wrote: @agami you should not compare amiga ppc to pc

You are the one who keeps comparing Amiga PPC to the performance of a cheap PC from the late '90s.

AmigaOS 4 systems are not gaming systems, by any stretch of the imagination. So it doesn't really matter which Radeon GPU you have in there. It's just for drawing screens, rendering text and icons, and animating mouse and cursor movements.

Last edited by agami on 17-Jan-2025 at 01:00 AM.

_________________
All the way, with 68k

@kolla

Quote:

kolla wrote: @agami Quote: Open Computing Platform Surely you mean the Open Compute Platform? OCP is an alternative server architecture ("enterprise") and not really relevant to anything discussed here.

Nope, the Open Computing Platform.

It's a label that isn't used much these days, but it is the platform IBM hacked together to quickly launch the PC, and it's the platform which has evolved over time to be the foundation of all PCs to this very day.

Last edited by agami on 17-Jan-2025 at 01:01 AM.
Last edited by agami on 17-Jan-2025 at 01:01 AM.

_________________
All the way, with 68k

@matthey

Quote:

Actually, the Intel Core i7-920 outperforms the RPi 5 with Cortex-A76 cores in the Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark. https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-raspberry_pi_5_b_broadcom_bcm2712-vs-intel_core_i7_920 The Cortex-A76 outperforms in the single core Geekbench benchmark but the Core i7-920 design chose to use multi-threading which reduces single core performance and the design likely used power reducing compromises to keep the power reasonable on 2008 silicon, which is actually more than 15 years old. By 2010 15 years ago, the 32nm Core i7-970 was released. https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-raspberry_pi_5_b_broadcom_bcm2712-vs-intel_core_i7_970 The Core i7-970 electrical signals only have to travel roughly twice as far as the Cortex-A76 cores now, still a huge disadvantage. The multi-core performance is perhaps a bit like a relay race but it is still impressive that relay runners could outperform a single runner when the distance is doubled for the relay runners. The Core i7-970 is far from a slouch in single core performance too as it narrowly outperforms the RPi 5 Cortex-A76 in Geekbench 5 single-core performance. My original claim was that the RPi 5 CPU performance was about that of a 15 year old PC and I understand the huge CPU technology advantage of the RPi 5.

Why Geekbench when it's useless for games?

From https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=ARM+Cortex-A76+4+Core+3000+MHz&id=5739
Using PassMark CPU Mark

2018, ARM Cortex-A76 @ 3.0 Ghz MHz
Single thread = 1298
Multi-thread = 2566
Physics = 123 Frames/Sec
Extended Instructions = 2,894 Million Matrices/Sec


Q4 2017, AMD Ryzen 5 2500U laptop
Single thread = 1812
Multi-thread = 6526
Physics = 369 Frames/Sec
Extended Instructions = 3,325 Million Matrices/Sec


Q3 2018, AMD Ryzen 5 2500X desktop
Single thread = 2327
Multi-thread = 9455
Physics = 502 Frames/Sec
Extended Instructions = 5,002 Million Matrices/Sec


For legacy, Intel Core i7-970 @ 3.20GHz
Single thread = 1468
Multi-thread = 6543
Physics = 445 Frames/Sec
Extended Instructions = 3,093 Million Matrices/Sec


For cheap modern desktops with a games focus,
Intel Core i5-13600KF (one of the lowest-cost CPUs for LGA 1700 motherboards)
Single thread = 4127
Multi-thread = 37729
Physics = 2,243 Frames/Sec
Extended Instructions = 29,067 Million Matrices/Sec


AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (cheapest CPU for AM5 motherboards)
Single thread = 3851
Multi-thread = 26959
Physics = 1,820 Frames/Sec
Extended Instructions = 22,921 Million Matrices/Sec


AMD Ryzen 5 9600X
Single thread = 4590
Multi-thread = 30142
Physics = 1,997 Frames/Sec
Extended Instructions = 28,056 Million Matrices/Sec


Physics is important for game engines.

The majority of the use cases for the Amiga brand are games.

Last edited by Hammer on 17-Jan-2025 at 01:40 AM.

_________________
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32/RPi CM4/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 4B/Emu68)
Ryzen 9 7950X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

@agami

Quote:

agami wrote: Nope, the Open Computing Platform. It's a label that isn't used much these days, but it is the platform IBM hacked together to quickly launch the PC, and it's the platform which has evolved over time to be the foundation of all PCs to this very day.

For most PCs in the year 2020 and beyond, Intel has removed IGP's legacy VBIOS i.e. they are not IBM PC compatible without adding a discrete GPU card from AMD or NVIDIA.

Intel IGP makes up the GPU majority for the PC platform's 2020 to 2025.

A modern UEFI X64 PC can boot into retro legacy mode (real 8086), but with no Adlib or Soundblaster support. Needs SB emulators for AC97 or HDA. There's an LPT Adlib workaround, but the LPT port was also removed.

A modern Intel PC with UEFI X64 Y2020 and beyond has lost legacy VGA and native Adlib/SB support which amounts to a DraCo-like situation i.e. missing Amiga OCS/ECS/AGA.

My PCs are modern AMD PCs with built-in legacy VGA support e.g. AM5 motherboard-based Ryzen RDNA2 IGP can boot into legacy's real mode 8086 with IBM PC compatible MDA/VGA display.

Retro PC mode in modern PC hardware has show-stopper issues.

_________________
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32/RPi CM4/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 4B/Emu68)
Ryzen 9 7950X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

My heads spins with all this technical info. :)

To my first point, even if you somehow get Amiga 3 or 4 to a 1 million GHz processor, you just shovel the crap real fast. Not to useful. I do really like some software for obscure one off stuff for sure like Outline and others. But just getting email setup and productive and doing real contact management or using the browser that works eludes Amiga and AROS can do anything with Rabbit Holing into unix but I much prefer to run native stuff. At that point I would just run Ubuntu and be done with it..

That is the tragedy of it all really. The software scene for any good stuff is dead.

I really tried to contact some of the authors and see if there was any interest. The few that replied were not interested, some tried to find source code that ended up lost, most didn't respond or couldn't be found...

@Matt3k

Quote:

you just shovel the crap real fast. Not to useful.

Correct

Quote:

I would just run Ubuntu and be done with it..

Yes

Quote:

That is the tragedy of it all really. The software scene for any good stuff is dead.

The Amiga is not a generic computer system any more, it does not fulfil the needs and requirements of a generic computer user. And it is mostly due to the operating system and how it works. However, Amiga does have quite a lot of features and software that makes it great for certain specific use cases, and it also has that special something that keeps people like us around, pushing its limits.

Quote:

I really tried to contact some of the authors and see if there was any interest. The few that replied were not interested, some tried to find source code that ended up lost, most didn't respond or couldn't be found...

Yes, that's how it is with old legacy proprietary software, not just on Amiga.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@agami

Quote:

Nope, the Open Computing Platform. It's a label that isn't used much these days, but it is the platform IBM hacked together to quickly launch the PC, and it's the platform which has evolved over time to be the foundation of all PCs to this very day.

Intriguing, can't recall ever hearing about this. I tried googling, but came up empty, too much noise, too many similarly named projects. Got any pointers?

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@Karlos

get lost with pistorm
accept that other may not want to use emulator
and may not want to switch back to aga

stop trolling start working on something usefull
real 68k with with speed on 060 level and graphics at least on ps1 level
cheaper than ppc

@agami

stop trolling start working on 68k
provide real 68k as fast as comfortable as cheap pc from win95 era
with 060 speed working FPU,MMU, 2D and 3D at least on PS1 level
cheaper than ppc

@ppcamiga1

No. I won't. You get over yourself. Accept that when among PPC/NG users the sane majority recognise that PPC has no benefit and certainly no cost advantage over moving to ARM. They are on PPC because that's all they have. You are in a monotonously vocal minority of approximately one, that thinks PPC is something worth clinging to.

If MorphOS were released for ARM or x64 machines tomorrow, do you think users would even blink before jumping off their ageing hardware? If OS4.2 appeared for ARM or x64 that it would be any different? You'd be the only PPC fanatic left, alone in a room, arguing with yourself.

It's true there are 68K users to whom emulation is an Anathema. They will surely pay extra for the privilege of scarce 68K hardware. And it's clear there's a market for it - plenty of new accelerator cards for 060 have appeared over the years and how rare are the best 060 masks now?

But you must equally accept that there are more pragmatic users to whom emulation is perfectly acceptable. Otherwise why would so many emulation options exist?

Now, isn't it time to copy and paste your usual BS response?

Last edited by Karlos on 17-Jan-2025 at 09:34 AM.

_________________
Doing stupid things for fun...

@ppcamiga1

Quote:

accept that other may not want to use emulator and may not want to switch back to aga

Those who not want it are not forced to use it! Does anyone pulls a gun at your empty head and tells you that from now on you MUST use PiStorm? No! So get your ass back into your cave and be happy.

Accept that many WANT to use Vampire/Pistorm or whatever else. For what other reason would they BUY these products? For God's sake, try to use your brain at least this time.

Sigh. I could write it in Polish language for you but unfortunately I know from my own experience that you have the same issues trying to read, write and understand in your native tongue...

@michalsc

szulc stop trolling start working on mui on aros

@Karlos

you want to switch it is your duty to provide something worth to switch
stop trolling start working on real 68k that will be at least on cheap pc from win95 era level

@ppcamiga1

Stop trolling on aw.net, go back to your beloved ppc!

_________________
Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home.
The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga

@pixie

stop trolling star working on mui on aros