English Amiga Board Amiga Lore


Go Back   English Amiga Board > Support > support.WinUAE

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 10 June 2014, 14:35   #1
amilo3438
Amiga 500 User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: EU
Posts: 1,116
68000 CE 8x speed problem ?!

Below are some tests that explain/show influence of MHz and Fast RAM to A500 speed:

Case 1) A500 7.09MHz 512 Chip + 512 Slow RAM = 553 Dhrystones (pic.1)

Case 2) A500 7.09Mhz 512 Chip + 1Mb Fast RAM = 729 Dhrystones (pic.2) ... ~1.32 X Case1

Case 3) A500 14.18MHz 512 Chip + 512 Slow RAM = 602 Dhrystones (pic.3) ... ~1.09 x Case1

Case 4) A500 14.18MHz 512 Chip + 1MB Fast RAM = 1520 Dhrystones (pic.4) ... ~2.75 x Case1 (OR ~2.08 x Case2)

EDIT: In addition...

Case 5) A500 28.4MHz 512 Chip + 512 Slow RAM = 640 Dhrystones (no pic.) ... ~ 1.16 x Case1

Case 6) A500 28.4MHz 512 Chip + 1MB Fast RAM = ... In SySinfo this test goes crazy (over 3x A4000@25) ?!? ... see EDIT3 below!

The test Case 6 was set to CE 8x speed (same as Case 5), so why it goes crazy, the reason cant be only because of Fast RAM ? ... test done with WinUAE2810b6.

EDIT2: If same test as Case 6 but with CPU 68020 instead of 68000 (or 68010) and it works fine !!! (SySinfo doesnt go crazy )


EDIT3: With a lot of reluctance the WinUAE problem finally fixed (see post 11), so now is able to complete the test:

Case 3) A500 14.18MHz 512 Chip + 512 Slow RAM = 593 Dhrystones (no pic.) ... ~1.07 x Case1

Case 4) A500 14.18MHz 512 Chip + 1MB Fast RAM = 1471 Dhrystones (no pic.) ... ~2.66 x Case1 (OR ~2.02 x Case2)

Case 5) A500 28.4MHz 512 Chip + 512 Slow RAM = 620 Dhrystones (no pic.) ... ~1.12 x Case1

Case 6) A500 28.4MHz 512 Chip + 1MB Fast RAM = ... 2956 Dhrystones (pic.5) ... ~5.35 x Case1 (OR ~4.05 x Case2 AND ~2.01 x Case4)
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	sysinfo_4_001.png
Views:	112
Size:	24.2 KB
ID:	40250   Click image for larger version

Name:	sysinfo_4_002.png
Views:	123
Size:	23.9 KB
ID:	40251   Click image for larger version

Name:	sysinfo_4_003.png
Views:	106
Size:	24.2 KB
ID:	40252   Click image for larger version

Name:	sysinfo_4_004.png
Views:	111
Size:	24.2 KB
ID:	40253   Click image for larger version

Name:	sysinfo_4_005.png
Views:	93
Size:	21.5 KB
ID:	40270  


Last edited by amilo3438; 11 June 2014 at 18:52.
amilo3438 is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
Old 10 June 2014, 18:29   #2
Toni Wilen
WinUAE developer
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland
Age: 42
Posts: 19,670
Sysinfo with config that does not exist in real world does not really mean anything at all. (and sysinfo even with real config does not really show anything useful either )

Last edited by Toni Wilen; 10 June 2014 at 18:38.
Toni Wilen is online now  
Old 10 June 2014, 18:47   #3
amilo3438
Amiga 500 User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: EU
Posts: 1,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toni Wilen View Post
Sysinfo with config that does not exist in real world does not really mean anything at all. (and sysinfo even with real config does not really show anything useful either )
How strange, testing the same config. (A500 68K 28MHz 512 Chip 1Mb Fast) on older WinUAE 2.0.1 and Sysinfo doesnt go crazy (see pic.) ?!
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Benchmark_v1_001.png
Views:	100
Size:	24.9 KB
ID:	40260  
amilo3438 is offline  
Old 10 June 2014, 18:54   #4
Toni Wilen
WinUAE developer
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland
Age: 42
Posts: 19,670
So? It still means nothing at all.

It could be overflow in sysinfo. Anything is possible. No way to test: don't care.
Toni Wilen is online now  
Old 10 June 2014, 19:17   #5
amilo3438
Amiga 500 User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: EU
Posts: 1,116
same A500 CE with custom 28.375160 setting and 512Chip + 1MB Fast...

on 2.6.1 test works fine (pic.1)

on 2.7.0 test goes crazy (pic.2) ?! (something is obviously broken and you still dont care ?!)
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Benchmark_v1_002.png
Views:	108
Size:	25.4 KB
ID:	40261   Click image for larger version

Name:	Benchmark_v1_003.png
Views:	107
Size:	25.4 KB
ID:	40262  

Last edited by amilo3438; 10 June 2014 at 19:23.
amilo3438 is offline  
Old 10 June 2014, 19:25   #6
Toni Wilen
WinUAE developer
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland
Age: 42
Posts: 19,670
Because I don't bother until it can be confirmed and if it is interesting. This can't be confirmed and is not interesting. You are also assuming that if something looks wrong, it is wrong. Never ever do that!

Maybe it becomes more interesting if you find the exact beta that started working differently.
Toni Wilen is online now  
Old 10 June 2014, 19:32   #7
amilo3438
Amiga 500 User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: EU
Posts: 1,116
I found it...

the problem starts from WinUAE 2.7.0 beta4 !!!

in 2.7.0 beta 3 it works fine with 8x or custom setting ! (lazybones )

EDIT:
2.7.0.beta3 -> http://eab.abime.net/showpost.php?p=901068&postcount=74
2.7.0.beta4 -> http://eab.abime.net/showpost.php?p=902679&postcount=88

p.s. CIA tod bug ON/OFF doesnt help !
Attached Files
File Type: uae test for Sysinfo.uae (10.4 KB, 29 views)

Last edited by amilo3438; 10 June 2014 at 19:49.
amilo3438 is offline  
Old 10 June 2014, 19:46   #8
Toni Wilen
WinUAE developer
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland
Age: 42
Posts: 19,670
Don't really see anything useful in change logs but try toggling CIA bug option in Advanced chipset to see if it has any effect.
Toni Wilen is online now  
Old 10 June 2014, 21:05   #9
amilo3438
Amiga 500 User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: EU
Posts: 1,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toni Wilen View Post
Don't really see anything useful in change logs
Therefore it is also important to keep the test versions between the two beta ... which of course you probably do not do.
(unfortunately, I started to collect a test betas after 2700 beta8)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toni Wilen View Post
You are also assuming that if something looks wrong, it is wrong. Never ever do that!
Do what !? Spending my free time to help finding a possible problem ?! (if you wish, no problem)

p.s.
I must say that it is not an interesting job to seek other's mistakes and if you find them, nobody will say thanks.
Yeah, thus one year of volunteering on this topic would be quite enough.

Cheers

1 year volunteering = cumulatively with 20 days of unused annual leave (just in time before the World Cup)


EDIT:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toni Wilen View Post
Sysinfo with config that does not exist in real world does not really mean anything at all.
According to BigFan (see below) there really exist a similar config:

GVP Supra turbo 28Mhz, A500 Accelerator
http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=28503
http://www.bigbookofamigahardware.co...uct.aspx?id=87


Yeah, also my mistake was I have not tried another example instead of Sysinfo. (BigFan, many thanks)

Last edited by amilo3438; 10 June 2014 at 23:14.
amilo3438 is offline  
Old 10 June 2014, 22:36   #10
BigFan
Registered User

BigFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 261
I don't give a shit on Sysinfo, but amilo is right.
I can confirm emulation is way too fast with this setting. Lha packs/unpacks archives more than 10x faster.
Workbench is loading and running as if JIT is enabled. It is odd to complain about additional speed , but it's definitely to much if one wants to emulate a Supra28 board f.e.
BigFan is offline  
Old 11 June 2014, 17:11   #11
Toni Wilen
WinUAE developer
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland
Age: 42
Posts: 19,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by amilo3438 View Post
Therefore it is also important to keep the test versions between the two beta ... which of course you probably do not do.
(unfortunately, I started to collect a test betas after 2700 beta8)
No need, source tree shows all changes in detail. I was simply not interested enough to check it yet, because of using sysinfo results

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigFan View Post
I don't give a shit on Sysinfo, but amilo is right.
I can confirm emulation is way too fast with this setting. Lha packs/unpacks archives more than 10x faster.
Thanks. This is much better report, I always prefer real time speed tests because they can't show incorrect times.

Quote:
about additional speed , but it's definitely to much if one wants to emulate a Supra28 board f.e.
It does not emulate Supraturbo28, it has 64k cache which allows CPU to run really fast if data is already in cache. But without fast ram results should be similar (supraturbo only caches fast mem data because caching chip ram would break most programs)

http://www.winuae.net/files/b/winuae.zip should fix it.
Toni Wilen is online now  
AdSense AdSense  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
BMX Simulator 68000 problem tomcat666 project.WHDLoad 8 04 October 2014 16:34
Degrading CD32 CPU speed to 68000? earok support.Games 5 16 January 2014 08:35
hardfile speed problem Ed Cruse support.WinUAE 24 16 October 2007 16:13
Amiga, 68000 and CPU speed SilentBob Retrogaming General Discussion 3 15 October 2006 15:45
Speed problem GoKu project.WHDLoad 10 08 September 2005 16:39

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:48.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Page generated in 0.19319 seconds with 13 queries