Poster | Thread |
tlosm
| |
Re: RageMem benchmarks between OS4 machines Posted on 17-Oct-2013 11:34:20
| | [ #201 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 28-Jul-2012 Posts: 2746
From: Amiga land | | |
|
| @Seiya
on 640x480 virtualpc have problems in visualization in dos mode, i will try di do the best.
note the gl dont work i will try to find a dx version VirtualPc have an emulated S3(trio) 2d only ..
Dosbox on MacOs Sux ... i have with 7500 cycles the same speed of Pegasos 2 on AOs4 Last edited by tlosm on 17-Oct-2013 at 11:38 AM.
_________________ I love Amiga and new hope by AmigaNG A 500 + ; CDTV; CD32; PowerMac G5 Quad 8GB,SSD,SSHD,7800gtx,Radeon R5 230 2GB; MacBook Pro Retina I7 2.3ghz; #nomorea-eoninmyhome |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
wawa
| |
Re: RageMem benchmarks between OS4 machines Posted on 17-Oct-2013 11:36:35
| | [ #202 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 21-Jan-2008 Posts: 6259
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @vox
Quote:
Would respond to it, but it was locked thread. |
so do you suspect a purpose of locking a thread is to have another opened on the same matter? good luck with that. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Seiya
| |
Re: RageMem benchmarks between OS4 machines Posted on 17-Oct-2013 11:54:56
| | [ #203 ] |
|
|
|
Super Member |
Joined: 19-Aug-2006 Posts: 1474
From: Italia | | |
|
| old x86 hardware (athlon64 x2 5200) emulate PowerMac with MacQuake Powermac emulator is mono thread..
audio problems only with this games..,but it's fast and very smooth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2v7NYxh_1bQ
Last edited by Seiya on 17-Oct-2013 at 11:55 AM.
_________________
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
tlosm
| |
Re: RageMem benchmarks between OS4 machines Posted on 17-Oct-2013 12:01:52
| | [ #204 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 28-Jul-2012 Posts: 2746
From: Amiga land | | |
|
| @Seiya
Im sure shapeshaver on the PowerBook will be more faster of this pc :) _________________ I love Amiga and new hope by AmigaNG A 500 + ; CDTV; CD32; PowerMac G5 Quad 8GB,SSD,SSHD,7800gtx,Radeon R5 230 2GB; MacBook Pro Retina I7 2.3ghz; #nomorea-eoninmyhome |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
cdimauro
| |
Re: RageMem benchmarks between OS4 machines Posted on 2-Nov-2013 9:15:36
| | [ #205 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 29-Oct-2012 Posts: 3650
From: Germany | | |
|
| Quote:
wawa wrote: while.. seriously. i think the speedup of an 64bit os against 32 version may not be significant if any. |
It depends primarily by the microprocessor architecture.
The x64 code on average is faster than the x86 one. The same applies to the new ARM64 (ARMv8) architecture compared to the 32-bit one (ARMv7). In both cases the new ISAs benefit from the registers doubling (both general purpose and SIMD).
The same doesn't apply to other architectures, such as PowerPC, SPARC, MIPS, where only 64-bit data & pointers are added. In such cases on average there's a LOSS of performance due to the increased data size (long -> 64 bit; not for all ABIs, but usually it happens) and pointer size, which causes more data caches and TLBs pressure. That's why jumping to the 64-bit wagon doesn't mean acquired performance; no, it's exactly the opposite: you LOOSE performance. Unless do you want to use more than 2GB of RAM (per single application, or for the whole envinroment), but it's a different question.
Just to be clear: even x64 and ARM64 loose performance due to the increased data and pointer sizes, but that's greatly balanced (in fact it even exceeded the performance) thanks to the registers doubling.
Anyway, a 64-bit architecture (data + pointer) gives other, SOME chances for optimizations, but it requires a lot of effort (and a creative mind), and in the end the results aren't comparable to a "simple" registers doubling. Quote:
i have once compared lightwave under 32 and 64bit winxp and the on 64bit it was a little slower. |
It's strange, because of the above. On average 64-bit applications are faster. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
vox
| |
Re: RageMem benchmarks between OS4 machines Posted on 2-Nov-2013 9:40:33
| | [ #206 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 12-Jun-2005 Posts: 3735
From: Belgrade, Serbia | | |
|
| @wawa
Well, I want to show there is an interest of users, even every thread possibly could be fastlocked or deleted. Sadly today I cant even do that. Well, goes around, comes around - such treatment of users request will return in no users.
_________________ Future Acube and MOS supporter, fi di good, nothing fi di unprofessionals. Learn it harder way! |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
marko
| |
Re: RageMem benchmarks between OS4 machines Posted on 14-Jun-2015 3:38:10
| | [ #207 ] |
|
|
|
Super Member |
Joined: 17-Dec-2007 Posts: 1816
From: Gothenburg, THE front side of Sweden ;), (via Finland), EU | | |
|
| My latest RageMem results with AOS 4.1 FE (Update 8), on my Sam440ep-flex 800MHz 1GB RAM and Radion 9250:
RAGEMEM v0.37 - compiled 11/06/2010
CPU: AMCC PPC440EP 1.3 @ 799 Mhz Caches Sizes: L1: 32 KB - L2: none - L3: none Cache Line: 32
--- CPU --- MAX MIPS: 1599
--- L1 --- READ32: 3024 MB/Sec READ64: 6031 MB/Sec WRITE32: 3024 MB/Sec WRITE64: 6032 MB/Sec
--- RAM --- READ32: 320 MB/Sec READ64: 320 MB/Sec WRITE32: 200 MB/Sec WRITE64: 200 MB/Sec WRITE: 890 MB/Sec (Tricky)
--- VIDEO BUS --- READ: 15 MB/Sec WRITE: 58 MB/Sec
-- --
With Update 3 I had (on the same machine):
RAGEMEM v0.37 - compiled 11/06/2010
CPU: AMCC PPC440EP 1.3 @ 799 Mhz Caches Sizes: L1: 32 KB - L2: none - L3: none Cache Line: 32
--- CPU --- MAX MIPS: 1598
--- L1 --- READ32: 2869 MB/Sec READ64: 5690 MB/Sec WRITE32: 2862 MB/Sec WRITE64: 5697 MB/Sec
--- RAM --- READ32: 316 MB/Sec READ64: 316 MB/Sec WRITE32: 199 MB/Sec WRITE64: 199 MB/Sec WRITE: 873 MB/Sec (Tricky)
--- VIDEO BUS --- READ: 39 MB/Sec WRITE: 58 MB/Sec
_________________ AmigaOS 4.1 FEu2 on Sam440ep-flex 800MHz 1GB RAM C128, A500+, A1200, A1200/40, AmigaForever 2008+09+16, 5 x86/x64 boxes Still waiting (or dreaming) for the Amiga revolution... m4rko.com/AMIGA |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|