2GHZ Motorola CPU for Amiga?

[Amiga Forever]

I would love to see someone making it for Amiga but i cant see it happening

[s2325]

And what will you do with that? Horsepower is not everything, you need also some magic combined with art

[HonestFlames]

Well... there was promise of Amiga accelerators based on Motorola (Freescale) ColdFire processors.

Never happened though :-/

We will just have to face up to the fact that the Amiga is a forgotten platform which will only receive the most limited development, undertaken usually by tech-savvy fans.

Even the X1000 may not live up to the hype (or even reach market). It's not even an Amiga, in the classic sense. It's merely a moderately decent collection of bespoke and off-the-shelf hardware running AmigaOS.

[Mequa]

Originally Posted by Amiga Forever

I would love to see someone making it for Amiga but i cant see it happening

Next best thing - get a monster high-spec PC (by single core performance) and run UAE with JIT compilation.
I would like to see various benchmarks for UAE on the latest Intel i7 on the fastest settings. Even if the benchmarks are inaccurate under emulation.

Emulated 68k Amigas have had a better price/performance ratio than "the real thing" for many years now.

[Toni Wilen]

3.5MHz chipset bus clock would kill the performance in any non-computation tasks.. And if you don't need chipset, use Aros or something like that

I have i7 920 @4GHz if you need stupid benchmark results..

[NovaCoder]

YEP that's true. The reason the A1000 was so powerful was its custom chipset working together with the CPU, after you get above an 020 it's normally faster to just use the CPU.

That said, I would love to see a 100Mhz 060 with modern memory just to see what could be done with AGA

[stachu100]

That's depends what you understand under "Amiga" word. :-)
Amiga - Classic line where 3,5MHz or ZORRO II/III are bottleneck
Amiga - AmigaOne, Sam, Pegasos, others where you have native PCI slots

So the real question is:
"For which Amiga?"

[Mequa]

Originally Posted by Toni Wilen

I have i7 920 @4GHz if you need stupid benchmark results..

And I thought the 4GHz models were an urban myth. Got water cooling?
I would be very interested to see such benchmark results if you have time. Could well be the fastest Amiga on earth.

I got something like a 900MHz 68040 in AIBB when running WinUAE + Direct JIT on my Core 2 Duo 2GHz. Not sure if that was accurate, or the result of benchmarking going awry under emulation.
(The same machine gives around 200MHz Pentium performance with DOSBox's x86-to-x86 JIT.)

[Toni Wilen]

Originally Posted by Mequa

And I thought the 4GHz models were an urban myth. Got water cooling?
I would be very interested to see such benchmark results if you have time. Could well be the fastest Amiga on earth.

I got something like a 900MHz 68040 in AIFF when running WinUAE + Direct JIT on my Core 2 Duo 2GHz. Not sure if that was accurate, or the result of benchmarking going awry under emulation.
(The same machine gives around 200MHz Pentium performance with DOSBox's x86-to-x86 JIT.)

Cooler is Corsair H50 (lazy man's water cooling, I started to hate huge and heavy heat sinks but didn't want to use "real" water cooling) I also noticed that powersupply quality is very important, my HX850 died, switched to my old model temporarily, near-insta crash unless I lowered OC to 3.6GHz.. Warranty replacement arrived, 4GHz works perfectly fine again.. (No special tweaks used, slight voltage increase and other minor adjustments)

i7 920 is the best ever CPU for overclocking. (second best is Celeron 300A )

Just say what benchmarks to do (do not ask anything silly like SysInfo or anything that gives random frequency values, they don't really mean anything)

[Mequa]

Perhaps you could benchmark the Amiga port of Quake 1 with JIT and RTG at 1024x768 or higher ("timerefresh" at console should give FPS).

(Whoops, meant "AIBB" in earlier post. This gives funky results with max JIT.)

[Fabie]

Originally Posted by Toni Wilen

Cooler is Corsair H50 (lazy man's water cooling, I started to hate huge and heavy heat sinks but didn't want to use "real" water cooling) I also noticed that powersupply quality is very important, my HX850 died, switched to my old model temporarily, near-insta crash unless I lowered OC to 3.6GHz.. Warranty replacement arrived, 4GHz works perfectly fine again.. (No special tweaks used, slight voltage increase and other minor adjustments)

i7 920 is the best ever CPU for overclocking. (second best is Celeron 300A )

Just say what benchmarks to do (do not ask anything silly like SysInfo or anything that gives random frequency values, they don't really mean anything)

yes... clickboom quake is a god task......timedemo demo 1
also please post your sysinfo results

[Mequa]

Another thing I'm curious about:
Is WinUAE on a monster i7 fast enough to run AmigaOS/68k E-UAE with AGA games at full speed?

I know it's pointless in practice. But to run UAE on UAE at a decent speed is quite technically impressive. (Even if only x86 UAE has JIT.)

[Toni Wilen]

Quake: too much work, sorry.
Sysinfo: screenshot attached but sysinfo is crap test program, its accuracy sucks when CPU gets too fast.

[Paul_s]

Your Amiga out performs a Cray 1 Toni... Is there something you are not telling us?

I bet you run Windows 7 emulated on a 500

P.S Did ANYONE actually phone Nic Wilson when it says in the comment box 'Phone me NOW!!!!' ?
I wonder what he'd say if he received a call today

[Fabie]

Originally Posted by Toni Wilen

Quake: too much work, sorry.
Sysinfo: screenshot attached but sysinfo is crap test program, its accuracy sucks when CPU gets too fast.

it seems that sysinfo stop to report anything high than around 800 mips
I had an athlon xp 3000 and reported 800 mips...now I have an athlon x2 which is a bit faster but still reports 800 mips

[Mequa]

I got 900+ MIPS in my SysInfo results (enclosed).

As for Quake on WinUAE:
I found that this port of Quake 1.09 was a bit faster than the Clickboom edition, so decided to test that (with PC Quake data files).

On my laptop (HP Pavilion dv9000 series, model dv9299ea), which has Intel Core 2 Duo T7200 @ 2GHz CPU and nVidia GeForce Go 7600 GPU, I decided to benchmark WinUAE with the fastest JIT settings and RTG by running a simple "timerefresh" test in Quake immediately on starting a new game.

Just for fun, I compared the results with the latest version of DOSBox (max CPU settings) and Quake 1.07 (the last version I could find for DOS).
Let's just say, the results were interesting:

(resolution): WinUAE -- DOSBox - WinUAE (no JIT) -DOSBox (no JIT)
320x240 --- 138 fps -- 52 fps --- 9.5 fps --------- 7.8 fps
640x400 --- 61 fps --- 28 fps --- 5.6 fps --------- 4.2 fps
640x480 --- 52 fps --- 24 fps --- 5 fps ----------- 3.6 fps
800x600 --- 37 fps --- 18 fps --- 3.7 fps --------- 2.8 fps
1024x768 -- 24 fps --- 12 fps --- 2.5 fps --------- 2 fps
1152x864 -- 19 fps --- 10 fps --- 2.1 fps --------- 1.7 fps

(Also got 14fps in 1440x900 with WinUAE + JIT - though WS modes can be buggy)

For comparison purposes, the native WinQuake build (without 3D acceleration) can struggle to reach 60fps in 1024x768 on this setup.

Looks like WinUAE's JIT performed around twice as fast as DOSBox. Not bad.
I'd like to see how fast WinUAE does on an i7. Could it push 60fps in Quake at 1024x768 or even 1920x1080?

[Jgames]

Did you try "dynamic recompilation", which i think is another name for JIT, for the cpu emulation in dosbox?

[Toni Wilen]

Comparing different platforms is silly..

Quake testing: I'll do it if there is single archive (without original quake pak files) that can be unpacked to empty directory. Anything more complex: not worth the trouble.

[Mequa]

Originally Posted by Jgames

Did you try "dynamic recompilation", which i think is another name for JIT, for the cpu emulation in dosbox?

Of course, it would have been much slower without it. (I also had max cpu).

Edit: I just added the results in DOSBox without dynamic/JIT for comparison purposes.

[Jgames]

Originally Posted by Mequa

Of course, it would have been much slower without it. (I also had max cpu).

If at 640x480 winuae is 5 fps (without JIT), then maybe it's even less with dosbox! (confirmed now that i saw your update)
But this comparison as Tony said is just silly.

In any case, the dosbox team don't care about optimising it (i should say, prefer correctness VS speed), and it uses SDL, so maybe that's the reason it is sooooooo slow.