I don't understand how a 68k version could have "playability issues" under WinUAE - it's even faster than a PPC Amiga!

As for AROS, stability issue are plausible, but I don't see how you can have problems with "exchange of data between several computers, etc". I can *easily* copy files into & out of WinAROS, and VwmAros is even easier.

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

Why not a WinUAE version? There are may people that we have this system, we want enjoy WordMeUp XXL too.

@ChrisH

Quote:

I don't understand how a 68k version could have "playability issues" under WinUAE - it's even faster than a PPC Amiga!

Nice joke!

WinUAE speed on computer of my brother (Core 2 Quad Q6600 2400 MHz) is equal to G3 250-300 MHz...

Hello to you all,

Thanks for your opinion. I respect them but it's not mine.

I don't want to argue. Please respect our decision.

Glames

_________________
Glames / Boing Attitude :)

@pavlor
It probably depends on what tests you run. I recall that my tests showed an 800MHz AmigaOne was at best the same speed as WinUAE, and certainly a lot slower if you compare 68k JIT to 68k JIT.

P.S. OS3's memory allocator is a LOT slower than OS4's, so if your test program does lots of heavy memory (de)allocations (without using pools or it's own memory buddy system), then OS3 on WinUAE will certainly come out worse.

Last edited by ChrisH on 16-Jul-2008 at 07:05 PM.
Last edited by ChrisH on 16-Jul-2008 at 07:04 PM.

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

@ChrisH:

No, it depends on what you´re actually comparing. If you tell people that a WinUAE System outperforms an AOne (and you didn´t talk about the emulation part, you remember?) you will certainly gain a big laugh for this. Even a 3GHz machine running WinUAE will not outperform a 800MHz G3 AOne , just because the system WinUAE is hosted on is so sluggish. Test it with gcc, if you like. The gcc3 will compile noticeably faster on the AOne, vbcc will compile even more faster than on WinUAE.

Even emulation comparing isn´t really fair, because for that you should compare it with a 800MHz Windows driven x86 machine, and, ermh, I don´t believe that it will be as fast in emulation as the AOne is (again: just because the host system is so sluggish). OS3 takes another part on it.

Comparing absolute speeds is another topic, there a x86/3GHz will outperform a 800MHz G3 or G4 for sure (emulation part).

Regarding OS3.x: you´re right, that memory allocations are a topic, but you can use TLSFMem (or TSLF? Don´t remember yet) to compare. You will notice a considerable, but no sensational speedup.

WinUAE is a very nice, speedy near-to-replacement for OS3.x systems, but it isn´t as fast over all as it is always been told of. Especially graphics operations are relatively slow, sometimes sluggish, but that´s the fault of the not really optimized AmigaOS 3.x RTG systems respectively the ugly timing of Windows (chipset emulation glitches).

Regards

Last edited by whose on 17-Jul-2008 at 12:25 AM.

Why are we advised to use AmigaOS 4.1 if there's not going to be any more Amiga versions?

_________________
--
-=#Val#=-
Valiant@Camelot


Amiga 1000; Amiga 2000; Amiga 3000T; CD-TV; CD32;
AmigaOne-XE 800Mhz G4;Sam400ep 666Mhz;
AmigaOne X-1000 1.8Ghz PA6T-1682M

I don't want to speak for Glames but I think it's a wording problem that comes from our native language (french). I think that what Glames was saying is that there won't be other port (=version) on Amiga system (i.e. 68k and AROS, 68k being dropped and AROS only on hold until some system problems are solved). As such any Amiga freaks is advised to use one of the Amiga NG port : the OS4 or MOS version...
But remember it's only the way I see it, I don't speak for Glames...

_________________
AOS 4.1 : I dream it, Hyperion did it !
Now dreaming AOS 4.2...
Thank you to all devs involved for this great job !

@abalaban,

You're right

@others,

Words are maybe not well chosen but I used "AmigaOS 4.1" and "MorphOS 2.0" because they are latest (or soon to be) version of theses systems.

WordMeUp XXL was already released on MorphOS 1.4.5 and AmigaOS 4.0. It is compatible with MorphOS 2.0 and AmigaOS 4.1.


Thanks

_________________
Glames / Boing Attitude :)

@ Glames

I can understand the disappointment of those who only have 68k or WinUAE, but thanks for even trying the port.

_________________
Fred Booth
========================================
A500, A600, A1200 c/w Mediator and 030
AmigaOne and OS4.1
Mac LCII, G4 Powermac running OSX + Amigakit and MorphOS 3.0
Dell Mini 10 Netbook running IcAros and AmigaForever+Amikit+AmigaSys
2006 Macb

>I don't want to speak for Glames but I think it's a wording problem that comes from >our native language (french). I think that what Glames was saying is that there >won't be other port (=version) on Amiga system (i.e. 68k and AROS, 68k being >dropped and AROS only on hold until some system problems are solved).

I dont see any activity from the word me up developers to report problems to AROS or winuae team.

here was told in that way that aros or winaue seem not good enough to run that game but no Bug report.

On AROS hollywood is complex and run on AROS, the Hollywood Author report some Bugs on AROS and after 3-4 days AROS was good enough to run Hollywood.this happen also with other programs. know AROS is the unloved bird, many support MOS OS4 and hope this bird learn good fly(fast hardware with good price speed value)

I dont see that this game is complexer than other games, that release for 68k.the screenshot show there is no alphachannel use.

sure winuae have many settings to slow them done.try amikit or aiab for a optimal setting

somebody write that a aone is faster than a PC with winuae running at 2,4 GHZ.
i see that as a joke, there are well known becnhmarks of hd-rec done.ww.hd-rec.de

should i really post here benchmarks how many faster winuae on a AMD64 3000+ 1,8 GHZ CPU is in real world ?

compiling with gcc is no compare, when the aone have a fast 3,5 Hardrive and the laptop whose use have only a slow 2,5 drive.

or whose should build a testscenario so i can try out myself what program he compile and how long it takes on aone.

it is also not very usefull to benchmark gcc on PPC which compile PPC code and compare with a 68k cpu which compile 68k code.

all know PPC is a risc CPU, this mean there are less instructions.maybe it is more easy ti compile PPC code....

for me it is most important that the hardware is fast, and believe me, when i see fast PPC Hardware with a fair price, then many want buy PPC Hardware.

then in theory somebody should offer this hardware and can get money.

But both sides MOS/OS4 do not offer good speed hardware, so i use no OS4 and MOS.

I think its ok when word me up developers say we dont want that on 68k and AROS, but say AROS or winaue have problems without giving the developers of AROS/winuae a chance to fix that is not nice.

This remember me about the red versus blue war.

The red side say MOS is worse
the blue side say OS4 is worse

Last edited by bernd_afa on 19-Jul-2008 at 12:56 PM.
Last edited by bernd_afa on 19-Jul-2008 at 12:53 PM.
Last edited by bernd_afa on 19-Jul-2008 at 12:52 PM.

@Bernd:

Stop it! You already told a lot of nonsense on amiga-news.de about this topic and you shouldn´t flood this forum with this nonsense, too! You are not in the position to tell other people what they should do or think, as long as YOU are absolutely unable to get even one single information you absolutely need to give any advise or telling what is possible and what is not.

You didn´t even know who the development team is and tried to start another "PPC is evil" flame war right on, just because YOU suspected that the german distributor (of whom you thought they are the development team because you were to lazy to follow the link given with the topic!) told glames to stop any other version than PPC (means OS4 and MOS, and you simply disregarded the fact that you called this distributor once "OS4 fanboys", you remember?).

Next one is, you don´t want to really know anything about my development systems but want to tell other people that I am not able to compare gcc compilation times! This is hilarious!

You even don´t know how laptop development advanced in the meantime and how my machines are equipped in detail! So, I tell you, once and for all, that my laptop development machine bears a far faster HD than my µA1 (quite modern SATA drive, 250GB, µA1 has a ATA100 80GB HD!), 2GB of RAM and a 1,6GHz Centrino core, and I indeed CAN compare the both, but you can´t! Nonetheless WinUAE isn´t as fast as you (or even I) wish it to be.

In the opposite to your opinion, glames is not obliged in any way to tell the WinUAE or AROS people in detail of the problems he had with it, regardless of how often you may demand such an obligement. It simply doesn´t exist.

These people know about this fact, if they wish to, and they can fix it, if they want. Simple as that. glames has the option to tell them about the problems directly, but he has the option to simply drop any support, if he thinks that it isn´t worth the effort, too. You are not in the position to command glames to re-support WinUAE/68k and you really shouldn´t argue about it anymore using false assumptions and accusations as you did already on amiga-news.de.

That´s my last word and I strongly advise you to not drag this nonsense discussion to other fora just because your cruel anti-PPC-crusade isn´t supported by most people on amiga-news.de anymore. Just stop it now!

>Next one is, you don´t want to really know anything about my development systems >but want to tell other people that I am not able to compare gcc compilation times! >This is hilarious!

Wy so much words, only post a link to a praxis benchmark that show winuae is slower than aone on a 1,8 GHZ X86.

When you tell that micro aone compile faster than winaue than you should say how this can verify.

I can show much benchmarks that winuae is faster than aone with native code, but i dont want waste much time by do this.

If users are happy with aone good, but say aone is faster you shpuld show benchmarks.

maybe make a SDL benchmark.

If OS4 PPC systems are faster than winuae maybe i buy such a system

but i short test i find.

native reverb PPC C Code of aone 800 in compare to my amd64 3000+ with real 1,8 GHZ with amiblitz2 code.


OS4Final
HD-Rec Benchmark for DSP Effect "Reverb Pro"
_____________________________________________________________________
14.7x Speed at 44.1kHz/stereo
6.8 % average CPU load
Total time per 1 sec audio: 68.0ms (68.0ms noise, 68.0ms tone)
Version: HD-Rec V0.9x Beta (03.12.2006)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


amd64 3000+ with real 1,8 GHZ.
HD-Rec Benchmark for DSP Effect "Reverb Pro"

____________________________________________________________________
22.9x Speed at 44.1kHz/stereo
4.3 % average CPU load
Total time per 1 sec audio: 43.6ms (43.6ms noise, 43.6ms tone)
Version: HD-Rec V0.9z Beta (18.05.2008)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Copy&Paste:
Reverb Pro: 22.9x Speed (fx_reverb_pro.library)

and my system is a real old system

try out with your notebook system, and verify with your aone what vulues you geht

Last edited by bernd_afa on 20-Jul-2008 at 04:25 PM.
Last edited by bernd_afa on 20-Jul-2008 at 04:23 PM.