@pavlor

yes but it is a geek machine not beating fast hardware, already forgotten

with the same argumentation people like you are defending slow embedded hardware like Tabor, don´t you?



then I will in future compare Tabor with my fastest PC too

Last edited by OlafS25 on 09-Nov-2015 at 10:49 AM.

@OlafS25

Quote:

yes but it is a geek machine not beating fast hardware, already forgotten

Did you read posts on EAB about fantastic future of 68k FPGA hardware that will satisfy most user needs and beat PowerPC...

PowerPC emulation on my hardware is slower (in most cases) than real hardware (eg. comparable to G3 500 MHz).
My point is: 68k software runs faster (much faster in this case) on available PowerPC hardware than on any real or FPGA based 68k machine. This combined with some modern OS and application features makes PowerPC boards attractive.

Quote:

then I will in future compare Tabor with my fastest PC too

May I choose benchmark then?

@pavlor

you think Tabor beats modern PCs?

@pavlor

and you completely miss the point too... 68k libraries are much more optimized than the PPC ones

so even if Tabor or any other PPC hardware beats 68k software on UAEin a benchmark what does it show? Besides how do you run AGA demos there? UAE is lower (relative) because it emulates a lot of things (unlike Amithlon as a example)

Besides nobody said FPGA beats PPC now on a large scale but next generation FPGA would beat slower PPC and perhaps beat PPC on special cases

Last edited by OlafS25 on 09-Nov-2015 at 11:10 AM.

@OlafS25

Quote:

you think Tabor beats modern PCs?

You don´t even know my subtle mastery of benchmark forging.


I may choose MPlayer benchmark under AmigaOS 4 with video display... your PC wouldn´t have chance. Sure, it is not fair benchmark, but you asked for one...

@pavlor

I am just updating my Aros X86 Win hosted version and then run it on my 2.7 Ghz PC. What do you say?

@OlafS25

Quote:

I am just updating my Aros X86 Win hosted version and then run it on my 2.7 Ghz PC. What do you say?

Do I look like interested in AROS (well I´m, but not for purpose of this reply )?

People buying hardware for OS4 are interested in performance under AmigaOS 4; not Linux, Windows, Haiku, MiNT, Risc OS or AROS. Your PC is able to run OS4, that is why I asked for this specific benchmark.

@pavlor

when you say Tabor or other PPC hardware beats modern PCs why should I use a option with handbrakes and feet on brakes and a weight of 2 tons connected with a steel rope at the car?

then I of course use the fastest option too

you keep your bet that Tabor is faster than the fastest PCs?

@OlafS25

Quote:

then I of course use the fastest option too

If this runs AmigaOS 4...

@pavlor

FPGA based system is a pure toy (a little like Raspberry)

if buying something for 1000 EUR you compare it to the alternatives. And there any PPC related hardware looks poor, with Amiga sticker or without.

@pavlor

for what purpose?

I use mainly Aros so if I compare then I use Aros for it

I think we are talking a little from different things... i say hardware is slow (too slow without modern features like JIT for browsing) and people might be disappointed if using it as first machine and not just as a toy. You say Tabor is faster than AmigaOS running in emulation. But that does not mean Tabor as hardware is faster than a modern PC.

Last edited by OlafS25 on 09-Nov-2015 at 11:40 AM.
Last edited by OlafS25 on 09-Nov-2015 at 11:37 AM.

double post. slow connection issue.

Last edited by wawa on 09-Nov-2015 at 11:50 AM.

the cool thing about amiga being "geek" platform is the variety of projects around it. especially hardware projects. just look at the number of accelerators released and in development, the hardware replacements or fpga implementations, usb interfaces, rtg cards. stuff like that people are simply able to design and build at home.

now when it comes to os4, the "geek" thing is apparently that you can run it today in uae, thanks to (68k) amiga coders. i dont see any os4 hardware projects, not even any for x-mos chip, except you count in few blinking diodes on a breakout board and some serial logger none even uses. in the other thread we have a prime example that os4 hardware projects end simply in endless talking. thats the actual difference.

@OlafS25

Quote:

I use mainly Aros so if I compare then I use Aros for it

I may take comparison against AROS 68k.


Sure, our points of view are completly different. However, not only OS4 users want to use their machines for some mainstream tasks. I mentioned threads on EAB, there many people dream about fast FPGA boards capable to support modern webbrowsing... My own needs in this regard are rather limited (AmigaWorld.net doesn´t need fast hardware ).

Quote:

But that does not mean Tabor as hardware is faster than a modern PC.

Faster for runing AmigaOS 4 and its applications. Raw performance with native applications is of course separated by decades: I estimate 1 core of Tabor is as fast as (at best) 1/10 of single core integer performance of 4 years old computer of my brother (Core i5-2500K 3.3 GHz).

Last edited by pavlor on 09-Nov-2015 at 12:09 PM.

@pavlor

modern web browsing even on current FPGAs is impossible because of reasons like RAM. Also (if Odyssey would be ported) it would be without JIT too. What is true for Tabor (too slow for modern tasks) would be even more true for FPGA based 68k amiga hardware. Some would want to do it just because it is possible but it makes no sense. Most people are propably aware of it and do not have such expectations. Perhaps Gunnar is a little too euphoric when posting in forums (I assume you mean him) but it is not realistic. A lightweight browser like Netsurf is realistic maximum. How future FPGAs develop (and such the accellerator cards) who knows. For me it would be a pure toy and fun platform. Most 68k users would not think about using it as replacement for normal standard hardware. PPC users often want different, they want to use it as their main machine.

@OlafS25

An FPGA product could have some cool uses especially if the design is allowed to evolve. I remember some earlier Natami discussions on providing dedicated functionality (in optional extra chips?).

For example, have a main board with one main FPGA chip. However could have a "deluxe" board (or a plug-in carrier?) with one or more extra chips to support things like MP3/JPG/H264/VP9 decoding in hardware.

FPGA computing is a brave new world and it's really down to a lot of hacking time to see how it evolves. I expect a cool ecosystem to evolve especially as the cores become available both on stand-alone products and as accelerators.

Interesting times....

@gregthecanuck

I am no hardware expert so cannot judge what is possible. Every complexity adds costs and makes it more expensive. At the moment we need cheap simple solutions that add some advanced features like HDMI with FPGAs that are big enough for new advanced chipsets and processors.

And yes I am excited too about it :)

It offers at least a chance to revive the platform to a certain degree

@OlafS25

Yup it would be very cool to turbocharge my A3000. Some day.

hehe lets try wtih uaeppc emulation on the tabbor board. and then run os 4.1 classics

i think it would lack big time

@pavlor

Don't forget that modern PCs are much faster than something like an i5-2500 for emulation. Architecture changes have improved emulation performance considerably (up to about 2x at same clock rate, plus increased clock rates).
Its entirely possible to have a modern PC emulate ppc faster than most "Amiga" ppc systems (sans fpu).
You keep referring to a pretty outdated PC when talking about ppc emulation speed, which isn't representative of the full picture.