@maurensen

On German pegasosfoum some ppl claimed MorphOS runs Q1-3 ~30% faster than AOS4. Haven't confirmed that bench yef though and would't overstimate this.

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

@olegil

Just had a look, timerefresh and timerdemo didn't seem to work.. I shall keep fiddling..

_________________
Rage quited 29th May 2011

@Stephen_Robinson

Q3? "\cg_FPS 1" should apparently do the trick then "timedemo 1" supposedly runs the demo

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

Doh, thanx Zylesea!
At least someone is doing some test for fun
C'mon guys, let's post something else! I need more popcorn!

_________________
Excuse me in advance for my very poor english.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PowerBook G4 15" 1,67ghz running OSX (for now), MorphOS (when it's done!).

@olegil

Right, using timedemo demo1 on the latest version of Quake on Amiga OS4.1 gives

1280 by 1024 gives 16.8FPS
800 by 600 gives 36.9 fps
640 by 480 gives 50.5fps

Just off to measure it in MorphOS, back in a mo!

Oh, dosn't find demo1 on fuhquake :( Can't get it to work sorry.

edited to add, just downloaded Quake I 2.30/MosQuake that allows me to run timedemo:

1280 by 1024 gives 19.5
800 by 600 gives 42.2
640 by 480 gives 57.9
(thats all in 8 bit)

Yeah for MorphOS!

Last edited by Stephen_Robinson on 14-Feb-2009 at 09:24 PM.
Last edited by Stephen_Robinson on 14-Feb-2009 at 09:23 PM.
Last edited by Stephen_Robinson on 14-Feb-2009 at 08:56 PM.

_________________
Rage quited 29th May 2011

@Stephen_Robinson

Pegasos 2 with G4/1.0 GHz, MorphOS, fuhquake, Radeon 9200 SE - 74 fps here for 640 x 480.

_________________
Reggae · MorphOS Files · DigiBooster 3

@Stephen_Robinson

remember that when you are benchmarking 3d on MorphOS you should disable vsync. You can do it with this command:

setenv TGLSYNC 0
flushlib tinygl.library

it won't limit refresh rate to the refreshrate of your display.

@Stephen_Robinson
Quote:

For OS4.1 [...] The CLI starting in the active draw that's open

Actually, you can do almost the same MorphOS. Select any drawer icon in Ambient, right click, there should be a "Open Shell..." menu item in the context menu, where you can start a Shell with the selected directory as default.

Additionally, you can drag & drop any element from the path buttons of any Ambient window to any open Shell, to easily switch to that directory.

_________________
MorphOS, classic Amiga, demoscene, and stuff
"When a bridge is not enough, build a Viaduct!"
"Strip the Amiga community of speculation and we can fit every forum on a 720k floppy" (by resle)

@Stephen_Robinson

Quote:

Stephen_Robinson wrote: @balis Persoannaly i think they're both about as good as each other, my early experience of MorphOS suggested it was a bit more buggy, but I traced that down to a dodgy hard drive. d'oh! I've been meaning to write a more detail description of the likes and dislikes of each, For OS4.1 Screen draging, warm reboot, The CLI starting in the active draw that's open more traditional feel, For MorphOS able to power down from software scroll bars in shell That sort of thing, but I can't be bothered.

Eh? You can do a warm reboot or shutdown from software in os4..

The shell..haven't seen OS4.1 (or MOS 2) if there are any changes, but MUICon (think that's it's name?) on MOS blows away anything currently on OS4.

Still has nothing to do with benchmarks though..which is the topic of the thread.

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

@wegster

Quote:

Eh? You can do a warm reboot or shutdown from software in os4..

Maybe it's a driver issue affecting the pegasos OS4 distribution. MorphOs needed a surprising long time to include that feature, too. And for the Pegasos 1 it is still not working Anyway,I don't judge powering off by software very important. I have a switch at my outlet to save energy which otherwise would have been wasted during ATX-stand by anyway.

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

@wegster
Quote:

Eh? You can do a warm reboot or shutdown from software in os4.

You can do ATX hardware power-down with OS4? Since when? That feature was not there in the OS4 final + uA1 i had. I think the functionality was missing from the hardware at all, because Linux couldn't do it either. (On Pegasos II, Linux does it too.) Maybe the Samantha has this, no clue, but that's another story. But on Peg2 + OS4, it's also not supported for sure, at this time.

Of course it is no real biggie to add it, but also this is something everyone should be able to live without, so it was low on the priority list, i guess.

@Zylesea
The Pegasos 1 will probably never have a powerdown-from-OS feature, because there is no support in the old Peg 1 OF versions for ATX shutdown, AFAIK. Maybe it could be hacked anyway, but i don't think it's worth the effort.

_________________
MorphOS, classic Amiga, demoscene, and stuff
"When a bridge is not enough, build a Viaduct!"
"Strip the Amiga community of speculation and we can fit every forum on a 720k floppy" (by resle)

Well... You can live with no shutdown from the OS. But for me it's like you couldn't turn you car's motor off with the key, and needed to press some special button in the motor itself. This is stupid... But you could live without it, of course...

_________________
http://www.warpdesign.fr/

@kiero

Quote

What matters is what user gets and this should be
benchmarked (using similar software where possible).

/Quote


That is so true..


Ok, a bit off topic here, but I believe the difference in performance of AOS/MOS is due
to the GFX subsystems in use.
In my experience i have found Picasso96 to be a lot slower than CGX in normal everyday use.


The spec of my Amiga si as follows:
A4000 68060 50 mhz / 604e 233mhz
128 Mb ram
CybervisionPPC
Cybervision64
VlabMotion
+ lots more..
(using 4 monitors)

Anyway, I tested the 68k version of Picasso96 against CGX 4.2, CGX thrashed Picasso96,
Picasso96 was orders of magnitude slower in ALL everyday stuff (Menus, Scolling, Screens).

Next I tried OS4.0 (Picasso96 included) versus OS3.9 + CGX 4.2...
Although the OS4 core functions where faster IE: Disc access, raw CPU power,
and a nicer looking workbench.
Real life graphics functions where a lot slower.

The following examples are subjective and approximate, this is what I've found on my Amiga.
All tested on 16 bit screens 1024 * 768 res.

Menus:
The appearence and disappearence of menus, between 2 times and 20 times longer for Picasso96
than CGX (depending on menu size).


Scroling:
While viewing a long web page in Ibrowse, scrolling vertically slowly Picasso96 jerky,CGX smooth.
While scrolling fast CGX a little jerky, Picasso96 failed, system seems to stall for 0.2 sec
then redraws the scrolled page Very Slowly (takes between 1 and 2 secs.!!!)

But overall the system FEELS slower with Picasso96.

And don't even get me going on how badly Picasso96 handles multipull GFX cards.


Anyway that's just my experience with stuff on my system, as for the topic of this thread
I think that MOS will win in the AOS/MOS on the same system game; just becaus MOS uses CGX.


PS: I live in the red camp and have never used MOS; and therfore claim neutrality


Wol.

Last edited by Wol on 15-Feb-2009 at 12:01 PM.
Last edited by Wol on 15-Feb-2009 at 11:58 AM.

_________________
It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder.~Albert Einstein

@AV

AV! How are you ? :)

@Stephen_Robinson

That's not unexpected, we know that MiniGL2.0 is under development.
And we know that Warp3D was a horrible mistake.

If you do same test different graphic card, you might get different results, depending on how well the drivers where written for that graphic card.

But the result might also say some thing about how well Quake was ported to AmigaOS4.1 or MorphOS, or are you using the 68k version, in that case the result is effected by the JIT emulator.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 15-Feb-2009 at 01:17 PM.

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

@kiero

Quote:

remember that when you are benchmarking 3d on MorphOS you should disable vsync. You can do it with this command:

If your going to benchmark MorphOS whit out Vsync then you shroud benchmark AmigaOS4.1 whit out VSync as well.

Do you play game whit VSync off? As long as you have about 50fps you don't notice any slowdown in the drivers, bestrides the fps number up in the right corner.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 15-Feb-2009 at 01:19 PM.

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

@NutsAboutAmiga

"If your going to benchmark MorphOS whit out Vsync then you shroud benchmark AmigaOS4.1 whit out VSync as well."

benchmark is a benchmark. it's that hard to understand? did i say he shouldn't disable vsync os os4?

"Do you play game whit VSync off?"

no, but we don't play game here but we use it as a benchmark.


PS. learn how to write 'with'. it's really not that hard.

@NutsAboutAmiga

"That's not unexpected, we know that MiniGL2.0 is under development."

he wrote it's done in 8bit modes so without acceleration.

"But the result might also say some thing about how well Quake was ported to AmigaOS4.1 or MorphOS, or are you using the 68k version, in that case the result is effected by the JIT emulator."

whichever excuse you find it still means (unaccelerated) quake runs slower on OS4 than on MorphOS.

@kiero

Quote:

PS. learn how to write 'with'. it's really not that hard.

I'm going to do something rather odd, here, I'm going to quote a post on MooBunny as I feel it makes sense

Quote:

"Speed tests aren't going to prove anything, as to be honest I could hardly trust them after the "other side's" long and shameful history of faked tests, especially for WarpUp, Picasso96 and A1/Peg memory speed. Even if Crisot and Hausser are gone, I still wouldn't trust any benchmarks from that camp. Just too many liars, name-followers and cover-up merchants. On the other hand, if OS4 turned out to just drag on the Peg when MOS flies, then that would at least be something interesting. If its something like a 4% speed increase in drawing windows on MOS and a 2% loss in background fill...zzzZzz"

http://moobunny.dreamhosters.com/cgi/mbmessage.pl/amiga/161172.shtml

In short, a quick play with both OSs show them both to be fast, efficient, easy to understand (for me) if unstable OS. I prefer them both to Windows, MacOS X and Linux,* and franky don't really care if one runs a program/opens a windows 8.56% faster than the other. Because in real life I'm not left sitting waiting for it to do something.


*I 'prefer', this does not mean I think that they are for everyone, or indeed they are 'BETTER'.

Last edited by Stephen_Robinson on 15-Feb-2009 at 02:59 PM.
Last edited by Stephen_Robinson on 15-Feb-2009 at 02:58 PM.

_________________
Rage quited 29th May 2011

@Stephen_Robinson

sure, but if the difference is more than this 8.56% then it starts to matter. you seriously didn't expect that quake (without opengl, so almost only using CPU) will have that much different speed, right?

test accelerated one. then you have more factors influencing speed. thing is to try to find tests which show bigger speed difference. differene of 20% does make a reallife difference.

Last edited by kiero on 15-Feb-2009 at 03:35 PM.