English Amiga Board Amiga Lore


Go Back   English Amiga Board > News

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 27 May 2016, 07:38   #141
gulliver
BoingBagged

 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The South of nowhere
Age: 38
Posts: 1,345
Quote:
Originally Posted by cylon View Post
autoconfig support & boardslib detection would be more useful. ;-)
+1
gulliver is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
Old 27 May 2016, 09:55   #142
Geijer
Oldtimer

Geijer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: VXO / Sweden
Posts: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cylon View Post
AutoConfig support & Boardslib detection would be more useful. ;-)
Yes, AutoConfig is definitely preferable!
Geijer is offline  
Old 27 May 2016, 17:14   #143
bubbob42
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Aachen, Germany
Posts: 292
Any progress with BoardsLib & SysInfo?

Sorry, had to ask
bubbob42 is offline  
Old 28 May 2016, 22:36   #144
Geijer
Oldtimer

Geijer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: VXO / Sweden
Posts: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbob42 View Post
Any progress with BoardsLib & SysInfo?

Sorry, had to ask
A redesign of the Boards page is quite high on the todo list to handle longer names to be able to use the results of BoardsLib.
Geijer is offline  
Old 01 June 2016, 10:53   #145
kolla
Registered User
kolla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 450
4.0 only sees 1MB of "slow ram" on the Minimig, instead of 1.5MB that is available. I can dig out screenshots and more memory addresses later
kolla is offline  
Old 03 June 2016, 00:40   #146
Geijer
Oldtimer

Geijer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: VXO / Sweden
Posts: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolla View Post
4.0 only sees 1MB of "slow ram" on the Minimig, instead of 1.5MB that is available. I can dig out screenshots and more memory addresses later
Thanks, will look into that.
Geijer is offline  
Old 10 June 2016, 23:21   #147
eXeler0
Registered User

eXeler0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Sweden
Age: 42
Posts: 1,206
@Geijer , is there any chance at all you would look into the MIPS benchmark code when running on superscalar CPUs so that it more accurately measures the performance of CPUs capable of executing 2 or more instructions in parallel?
(So basically, the 060 and the Apollo-core).

(Not sure what compiler you're using btw..)

Other (better?) ideas? Maybe add a "productivity" test such as "archiving a file" or similar?



Skickat från min HTC One via Tapatalk
eXeler0 is offline  
Old 10 June 2016, 23:35   #148
Cylon
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Europe
Posts: 332
Once you call a test result "Dhrystone" or "MIPS" you certainly have to stick to some algorithmic rules, otherwise it would just return "bogusmips" or whatever.
Cylon is offline  
Old 11 June 2016, 00:12   #149
eXeler0
Registered User

eXeler0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Sweden
Age: 42
Posts: 1,206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cylon View Post
Once you call a test result "Dhrystone" or "MIPS" you certainly have to stick to some algorithmic rules, otherwise it would just return "bogusmips" or whatever.
Yes, but a CPU that can execute 2 instructions per clock cycle is not measured fairly if the MIPS are for code running on only one pipeline.
Theoretically, a 50MHz 060 could have 100MIPS if we toy with the idea that every instruction can be executed in one cycle. But only if both pipelines are fully fed.

Skickat från min HTC One via Tapatalk
eXeler0 is offline  
Old 11 June 2016, 00:19   #150
Cylon
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Europe
Posts: 332
Yes, fairly enough. But the speed rating and drive speed results are qualified for a pit stop alltogether. Major overhaul, imho.
Cylon is offline  
Old 11 June 2016, 00:32   #151
eXeler0
Registered User

eXeler0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Sweden
Age: 42
Posts: 1,206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cylon View Post
Yes, fairly enough. But the speed rating and drive speed results are qualified for a pit stop alltogether. Major overhaul, imho.
You might have a point here, maybe SysInfo is a bit too old altogether to be fixable into something really useful on for e.g. the Vampire.

Skickat från min HTC One via Tapatalk
eXeler0 is offline  
Old 11 June 2016, 01:01   #152
matthey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Kansas
Posts: 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by eXeler0 View Post
Yes, but a CPU that can execute 2 instructions per clock cycle is not measured fairly if the MIPS are for code running on only one pipeline.
Theoretically, a 50MHz 060 could have 100MIPS if we toy with the idea that every instruction can be executed in one cycle. But only if both pipelines are fully fed.
Dhrystone MIPS are measured with some fairly simple C algorithms. Compilers can produce optimal code for superscalar processors like the 68060 and Apollo core but they generally don't for the 68k. Dhrystone MIPS ends up measuring the compiler optimization capabilities. The compiled code can be hand tweaked following the rules for Dhrystone which makes a huge difference but some would say that is cheating. Using the Dhrystone MIPS algorithm makes sense but then the decision of which resulting executable to use is not so simple. Of course anything would be better than the old SysInfo speed test which doesn't even use common instructions.
matthey is online now  
Old 11 June 2016, 01:07   #153
Cylon
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Europe
Posts: 332
I doubt the assembler used to compile SysInfo does anything specific regarding 040/060 behaviour. That's why it returns bogus results, even if the factor of speed increase is plausible.
Cylon is offline  
Old 11 June 2016, 01:58   #154
matthey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Kansas
Posts: 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cylon View Post
I doubt the assembler used to compile SysInfo does anything specific regarding 040/060 behaviour. That's why it returns bogus results, even if the factor of speed increase is plausible.
An assembler programmer has to do his own instruction scheduling and choose the instructions which work in all integer pipes. A compiler is supposed to be able to do this but most of the 68k compiler backends have trouble generating good enough code for an instruction scheduler to make much of a difference. The superscalar CPU just ends up executing instructions in parallel which shouldn't even exist.

Last edited by matthey; 11 June 2016 at 10:20.
matthey is online now  
Old 11 June 2016, 10:14   #155
Michael
A1260T/PPC/BV/SCSI/NET

Michael's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Moscow / Russia
Posts: 577
Under fast emulation, you can exceed 999 Mips, and get a result like 000.00
Maybe it would be possible to drop precision by one digit and show xxxx.x results
when we are running fast.
Michael is offline  
Old 12 June 2016, 16:38   #156
Prosonic
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Morwell Victoria Australia
Age: 41
Posts: 58
wow thanks I was using the original the other day wondering what happen to this guy
Prosonic is offline  
Old 12 June 2016, 20:08   #157
eXeler0
Registered User

eXeler0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Sweden
Age: 42
Posts: 1,206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prosonic View Post
wow thanks I was using the original the other day wondering what happen to this guy
The old 3.x version is pretty ancient but the 4.x version is still developed by this nice fella @Geijer.

Skickat från min HTC One via Tapatalk
eXeler0 is offline  
Old 27 June 2016, 22:44   #158
TuKo
Apollo Test Team

TuKo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 141
SysInfo 4.1b15 seems to crash with 68040 without FPU (reproducible under UAE) when running speed test. Is there a new beta version that fix it ?
TuKo is offline  
Old 27 June 2016, 23:22   #159
Geijer
Oldtimer

Geijer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: VXO / Sweden
Posts: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuKo View Post
SysInfo 4.1b15 seems to crash with 68040 without FPU (reproducible under UAE) when running speed test. Is there a new beta version that fix it ?
Thanks, CPU / FPU / MMU detection is redesigned in the next beta, I have to test if there is still a problem.
Geijer is offline  
Old 28 June 2016, 00:19   #160
Schoenfeld
electricky.
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: out in the wild
Posts: 1,155
Sysinfo 3.24 shows different speed results if you start it once, then move a few windows or do "avail flush" and restart it. I guess that the speed test code is depending very much on cache line alignment: If the core routine can take advantage of a full burst (4 longwords), it's faster and shows a higher value, although the machine is identical.

Is it possible to re-align the routine in fastmem to an address that has the lower 4 bits =0? Or even "configurable", so the routine is shifted in memory by 1-3 long words and the four values of four speed runs are shown in some debug window? Would be great to have the speed rating reproducable.

Another tool I use in accelerator development is "Bustest". Sometimes I think that an additional "speed" button on a memory list entry would be nice. Well, if you want additional items on your todo list ;-)

Jens
Schoenfeld is offline  
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
Picasso IV and SysInfo dannyp1 support.Hardware 2 26 January 2011 14:41
SYSInfo Kitty New to Emulation or Amiga scene 5 26 October 2009 00:58
req: sysinfo onkelarie request.Apps 4 05 December 2008 01:33
SysInfo Sofware lopos2000 support.Apps 2 23 July 2005 12:48
Sysinfo ? THX1138 support.Apps 4 10 November 2003 01:08

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 05:56.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Page generated in 0.24033 seconds with 12 queries