@ cha05e90
Quote:

Classic Amigas are limited to AmigaOS4.0 - does the last incarnation of MorphOS work on classic setups?

The lastest version for Cyberstorm/BBlizzardPPC is MorphOS 1.4.5. 2.x has not been published.

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

Quote:

OS4 on Pegasos2 - G4 - 1Ghz: --- Direct FastMem Write 32 bit -------- 8k: 3261.453 MB/s 128k: 1603.566 MB/s 8MB: 172.744 MB/s OS4 on AmigaOneXE - G4 - 933Mhz: --- Direct FastMem Write 32 bit -------- 8k: 3033.710 MB/s 128k: 1491.687 MB/s 8MB: 275.227 MB/s

These figures are really interesting! They could even indicate that the memory isn't even working in DDR mode (or something like that) when OS4 is running on the Peg-II

I say it again: There is time for "SetP2"

The cache speeds are comparativly faster on the PegII relative the clock speed, which is to be expected.

_________________
- Don't get fooled by my avatar, I'm not like that (anymore, mostly... maybe only sometimes)
> Amiga Classic and OS4 developer for OnyxSoft.

@Deniil715:
Quote:

They could even indicate that the memory isn't even working in DDR mode

DDR mode is not about doubling single direction speed, it's about capability of doing both reads and writes at the same time. It doesn't speed up independent memory reads or writes. But this simultaneous two-direction communication is unsupported by the G4 memory bus (MPX), hence a DDR memory in a 32 bit PowerPC environment will always work as "SDR" or normal SDRAM memory.

This is also true for 32 bit PowerMacs (all of them), in case you wonder, because no chipset can fix this. It's a limitation of the CPU bus itself.

_________________
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)

Crikey MOS really IS respectable on the hardware in 3d terms, comparable to a modern OS even! I really want one now :o)

_________________
Fraggle

- insert profound text here -

Quote:

DDR mode is not about doubling single direction speed, it's about capability of doing both reads and writes at the same time. It doesn't speed up independent memory reads or writes. But this simultaneous two-direction communication is unsupported by the G4 memory bus (MPX), hence a DDR memory in a 32 bit PowerPC environment will always work as "SDR" or normal SDRAM memory. This is also true for 32 bit PowerMacs (all of them), in case you wonder, because no chipset can fix this. It's a limitation of the CPU bus itself.

You've got this mixed up.
DDR is about doubling single direction speed, it works by transferring data on both the rising and falling edges of the clock - it even means "Double Data Rate".

You are correct about the CPU bus though. The G4 only has a SDR bus so using DDR RAM will not directly effect this.

Using DDR RAM probably does have effect though, it can't change the transfer speed but should reduce memory latencies at the chipset end when there's lots of transactions going on, also busses never work at 100% speed anyway and getting data out of RAM faster probably allows that to be boosted. Some G4 Macs used DDR RAM.

_________________
Whyzzat?

Interesting test results. Assuming that the tests were played fairly, it looks like MorpOS 2.3 wins this round.

Congratulations

---
redfox

Last edited by redfox on 12-Aug-2009 at 01:29 AM.

So in your opinion the memory performance results me and itix posted are false/faked/incorrect?

I haven't commented memory speed results (they were posted after my post anyway). I've just said that your assumptions about special memory controller setup in MorphOS are false.

_________________
Reggae · MorphOS Files · DigiBooster 3

With the recent AROS port of POSEIDON, now we can have a decent USB stack in OS4, if one will...

Quote:

I haven't commented memory speed results (they were posted after my post anyway). I've just said that your assumptions about special memory controller setup in MorphOS are false.

I don't want to challenge your intelligence, but the memory test results both me and itix posted clearly show that accesses to RAM on the same Pegasos2 hardware are much faster under MorphOS, while accesses to CPU cache are about the same. This can only mean one thing: Under MorphOS the memory setup/configuration is different than under OS4.

I am wondering, how many years have to pass, so developers of both communities to finally understand that they should work on one OS? Ambient is better than Workbench (in its current stage), why not try to implement it on OS4? Why not try and port final version of MUI, etc..? Is it so hard to cooperate? Do these people understand that buying two different OSes, two different hardwares, two different versions of the same software, make the users bleed economically? Atlhough we have developers, looks like they are shortsighted in certain aspects. And Hyperion should seek cooperation too in order to speed the development and implement new features.

_________________

I am wondering, how many years have to pass, so developers of both communities to finally understand that they should work on one OS?

Sure, but which one? I guess it should be one that:
1. Is more technically advanced.
2. Has no legal obstacles.

_________________
Reggae · MorphOS Files · DigiBooster 3

Quote:

Sure, but which one? I guess it should be one that: 1. Is more technically advanced. 2. Has no legal obstacles.

Don't forget "Is not limited to hardware no longer being produced"

I've stayed out of these threads for awhile, but I'll finally add my own two cents, and fuel the fire even more.. (sigh). MorphOS is generally faster (etc) than AmigaOS.. but it doesnt make me like my Sam440ep any less. I'm sure many people will disagree with me, but at the end of the day, AOS and MOS are basically the same thing! for many areas, its six of one, or half a dozen of the other. Just enjoy it. I'm not going to pretend AOS is the best in all area, and Im not going to ram my choice down other peoples throats. When someone posts tests (fair ones) showing that MOS runs a particular piece of software better (for example) then just accept it.

"boohoo someone badmouthed the memory system of an OS I use" , hehe :)

Okay, now to wait for people to reply with all the reasons why MorphOS is superior, then for the posts about why AmigaOS is still fine in comparision, and marginally better in other ways..... oh well, I guess its a bit more interesting than legal threads.

@Daff:

It would be very interesting to see benchmark results for some "big" application in order to have a good mixture of CPU, RAM, disk transfer, disk seek, etc,
For example a web server or a SQL database. Would that be possible?

Last edited by ara on 12-Aug-2009 at 08:04 AM.

@jahc Quote:

MorphOS is generally faster (etc) than AmigaOS..

Apart from USB & 3D, you are most likely wrong. MOS has only proved to be faster than OS4 on a Peg2. There is nothing which indicates OS4 is "slow" on a Sam440 or AmigaOne, compared to MOS.

_________________
Author of the PortablE programming language.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue...

@Krashan
Quote:

1. Is more technically advanced.

Does MorphOS support virtual memory? No? In this point, even Windows 3.1 on my old 486SX notebook is (are) more technically advanced...

For other benchmarks, I propose:
load/save time of .doc (MSWord) document (formating, footnotes etc)
load/save time of .xls (MSExcel) document
page loading time in OWB
copy of big file (>4 GB) on different filesystems

@jahc
That's the spirit! As much as i would like to have both OS4 and MOS, when the time comes i will most likely buy just one: MOS! But if os4 or aros become better, i would take one of them; i do not follow the trademarks, i just want to have amiga spirit on my desk. Whatever the name is!

ps.
i wanted to buy efika+mos this year, but i had to buy new wintel system for my programming. Bills won't be payed by themself

_________________
May the force be with you...

Don't forget "Is not limited to hardware no longer being produced"

This changed many times in the past and will change in the future. Then choosing "leading" system basing on this criterium may be misleading, especially as the only hadrware for AmigaOS 4 being produced is not the fastest one + is vastly overpriced. Anyway – joining of developer teams will never happen from any of the sides, so this discussion thread is pointless.

_________________
Reggae · MorphOS Files · DigiBooster 3

I think the point of my message wasnt clear.. let me summarise: who cares.
:)

As if benchmarks could spoil one's computing experience! The reason why somebody prefers MorphOS or AmigaOS is the system itself, its "spirit" and way of doing things - it is not about internals, and certainly not about a table of benchmark results.

_________________
The Rear Window blog

AmigaOne X5000/020 @ 2GHz / 4GB RAM / Radeon RX 560 / ESI Juli@ / AmigaOS 4.1 Final Edition
SAM440ep-flex @ 667MHz / 1GB RAM / Radeon 9250 / AmigaOS 4.1 Final Edition