WinUAE QEMU PPC - Page 12

ma693541 · 05 January 2015, 00:03

Ok. So Linux 64-bit have it, but not Windows 64-bit?

FrodeSolheim · 05 January 2015, 00:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by ma693541

Ok. So Linux 64-bit have it, but not Windows 64-bit?

Correct. The 64-bit QEMU-UAE plugin crashes on Windows, when used with either WinUAE or FS-UAE.

ma693541 · 05 January 2015, 00:10

S..t. Wish the 32-bit version of WinUAE or FS-UAE with PPC CPU support can run AOS 4.1 FE Classic seamless on my brand new i7 Gameing PC then. It use Windows 8.1 64-bit.

Mequa · 05 January 2015, 00:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by chocolate_boy

I would also like to try, did anyone get MorphOS 1.4.5 working yet?

I am also interested in MorphOS 1.4.5 compatibility with WinUAE and FS-UAE using the QEMU PPC plugin.

Newer versions of MorphOS run on totally different PPC platforms to Classic Amiga + PPC, so are not really relevant here. I know "bigfoot" got a crippled MorphOS emulation running in a tweaked QEMU, but this experiment was not continued. Either way, QEMU PPC looks the best bet for potentially workable MorphOS emulation (as with AmigaOS 4.x), although this may violate MorphOS terms and conditions.

Toni Wilen · 05 January 2015, 10:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrodeSolheim

Correct. The 64-bit QEMU-UAE plugin crashes on Windows, when used with either WinUAE or FS-UAE.

So this confirms it isn't (which I expected) MSVC + GCC compiled 64-bit DLL incompatibility. Something must be wrong with Mingw-w64 or QEMU does something strange or unexpected.

Quote:

I am also interested in MorphOS 1.4.5 compatibility with WinUAE and FS-UAE using the QEMU PPC plugin.

Not going to happen unless someone who really wants to debug PPC code does it.

Locutus · 05 January 2015, 12:25

I started on it, but something just feels horribly awkward to reverse engineer a tiny proprietary OS .

And as Toni said, its...so...booooring..... Maybe if i'm ever stuck in a snowed in mökki i might continue with it.

06 January 2015, 20:00

Alright...haven't followed the whole discussion, but I just noticed yesterday that WinUAE now has PPC emulation and boots OS 4.x, right?

Quick question...I used to develop software for AmigaOS 3.x and MorphOS. Budget is tight, so I'd like to purchase a copy of OS 4.1 FE Classic and run it on WinUAE. Is the emulation a) stable and compatible enough, b) fast enough to develop applications for OS 4.x in C/C++ on WinUAE?

I'd really like to support AmigaOS 4.x by developing some useful applications, but I cannot afford "real hardware" to do so.

I'm running on an i7 870 @ 2.93 GHz with 16 GB RAM.
Now that OS 4.1 FE Classic is very affordable I'd like to give it a shot, but compatibility, stability and speed (enough to "get the job done") are very important.

Thanks

And btw. great job on getting OS 4 to boot - PPC emulation is a very difficult task - especially if you want it to run at decent speed without sacrificing compatibility.

huepper · 06 January 2015, 20:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShawnBaxe

Alright...haven't followed the whole discussion, but I just noticed yesterday that WinUAE now has PPC emulation and boots OS 4.x, right?

Quick question...I used to develop software for AmigaOS 3.x and MorphOS. Budget is tight, so I'd like to purchase a copy of OS 4.1 FE Classic and run it on WinUAE. Is the emulation a) stable and compatible enough, b) fast enough to develop applications for OS 4.x in C/C++ on WinUAE?

I'd really like to support AmigaOS 4.x by developing some useful applications, but I cannot afford "real hardware" to do so.

I'm running on an i7 870 @ 2.93 GHz with 16 GB RAM.
Now that OS 4.1 FE Classic is very affordable I'd like to give it a shot, but compatibility, stability and speed (enough to "get the job done") are very important.

Thanks

And btw. great job on getting OS 4 to boot - PPC emulation is a very difficult task - especially if you want it to run at decent speed without sacrificing compatibility.

On your System OS4.1 will runing fast in WinUAE, trust me.

I have "only" an i5 with 16GB ram and it ist really faster than original Hardware. (A4000 + CSPPC)

[some german stuff]
Eine gute Anlaufstelle für eine deutschsprachige Diskussion wäre www.a1k.org , nur so als Tip, falls du da noch nicht registriert bist.

Da treiben sich auch allerhand Coder rum und viele Hardware Freaks.

Auch um WinUAE wird sich dort fleissig gekümmert.

Weiterhin ist auch www.os4welt.de zu empfehlen, da OS4 dort halt vorrangig behandelt wird, egal ob Emu oder real.

[/some german stuff]

07 January 2015, 12:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by huepper

On your System OS4.1 will runing fast in WinUAE, trust me.

I have "only" an i5 with 16GB ram and it ist really faster than original Hardware. (A4000 + CSPPC)

[some german stuff]
Eine gute Anlaufstelle für eine deutschsprachige Diskussion wäre www.a1k.org , nur so als Tip, falls du da noch nicht registriert bist.

Da treiben sich auch allerhand Coder rum und viele Hardware Freaks.

Auch um WinUAE wird sich dort fleissig gekümmert.

Weiterhin ist auch www.os4welt.de zu empfehlen, da OS4 dort halt vorrangig behandelt wird, egal ob Emu oder real.

[/some german stuff]

Okay - thanks. Just ordered my copy of AmigaOS 4.1 FE Classic an hour ago.

Programming on AmigaOS has always been a lot of fun. And while having fun doing that stuff it's also kinda supporting the platform - win-win-situation

Thanks Toni for all the hard work you put into WinUAE. Glad to finally see OS 4 and PPC emulation in general to be part of the project. Also thanks to you, Frode - you've been working with Toni on the QEMU side for WinUAE as far as I know? Great job, man.

[German]
Ja, hab mich da umgesehen - danke Dir

[/German]

Doc · 07 January 2015, 17:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShawnBaxe

Now that OS 4.1 FE Classic is very affordable I'd like to give it a shot, but compatibility, stability and speed (enough to "get the job done") are very important.

I'm running WinUAE3.1/OS4.1FE on an i3 M330 Laptop, also coding (a little). Feels like my A4k/030/OS3, so yes, your system (

) is by far powerful enough. Save often in case you, like me, experience random crashes.

Romanujan · 09 January 2015, 20:34

Does anyone know whether the SysSpeed 2.6 MIPS/MFLOPS are good benchmarks for the emulators? I did some tests:

Code:

Test       OS3 - 64bit  OS4 - 64 bit  OS4 - 32 bit  

68K-MIPS        146.59          0.04          0.04
68K-MFLOPS        9.94        112.83         84.92
PPC-MIPS      54567.62      59814.01      26862.27
PPC-MFLOPS      196.79        191.43        157.19

Configurations:

OS3 - 64bit - FS-UAE, Amiga OS 3.9 BB2 with lots of 3rd party patches, 68060, no JIT
OS4 - 64bit - FS-UAE, Amiga OS 4.1 FE
OS4 - 32bit - WinUAE, Amiga OS 4.1 FE

WinUAE was version 3.00, 32-bit, running on Windows 7 64-bit
FS-UAE was version 2.5.23, 64-bit, running on Gentoo Linux, compiled (both emulator and QEMU plugin) be me using GCC 4.8.3, with -march=native

Host system was Core i7 4790k @ 4GHz (stock frequency), DDRAM3 1600 MHz CL10

-------

It seems the 64-bit is much faster at emulating the PPC

09 January 2015, 20:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Romanujan

Does anyone know whether the SysSpeed 2.6 MIPS/MFLOPS are good benchmarks for the emulators? I did some tests:

Code:

Test       OS3 - 64bit  OS4 - 64 bit  OS4 - 32 bit  

68K-MIPS        146.59          0.04          0.04
68K-MFLOPS        9.94        112.83         84.92
PPC-MIPS      54567.62      59814.01      26862.27
PPC-MFLOPS      196.79        191.43        157.19

Configurations:

OS3 - 64bit - FS-UAE, Amiga OS 3.9 with lots of 3rd party patches, 68060, no JIT
OS4 - 64bit - FS-UAE, Amiga OS 4.1 FE
OS4 - 32bit - WinUAE, Amiga OS 4.1 FE

WinUAE was version 3.00, 32-bit, running on Windows 7 64-bit
FS-UAE was version 2.5.23, 64-bit, running on Gentoo Linux, compiled (both emulator and QEMU plugin) be me using GCC 4.8.3, with -march=native

Host system was Core i7 4790k @ 4GHz (stock frequency), DDRAM3 1600 MHz CL10

-------

It seems the 64-bit is much faster at emulating the PPC

Of course it is. 64-bit CPUs have multiple cores, which can be used by 64-bit applications. 32-bit applications can run on single-core CPUs. That can make a huge difference

As far as I know, Windows can distribute the 32-bit load between multiple cores, but still you won't get the same speed you'd have if the application was natively using more than one core.

Romanujan · 09 January 2015, 20:52

This has nothing to do with cores - rather with the CPU registers!

I was only surprised the 64-bit is twice as fast in MIPS test...

09 January 2015, 21:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Romanujan

This has nothing to do with cores - rather with the CPU registers!

I was only surprised the 64-bit is twice as fast in MIPS test...

Registers is one thing - cores significantly add to that. Using the Unreal Engine 4 source code on a daily basis, I had to learn that

But...yeah...it is really interesting. Don't know how accurate those tests really are, but considering that UAE is a pretty solid and mature emulator I would think so.

Toni Wilen · 09 January 2015, 21:14

WTF? CPU emulator that emulates single core CPU won't and can't get ANY help whatsoever from multiple cores!

Number of registers and register width causes the difference. QEMU uses 64-bit variables in many places.

(EDIT: sorry about that but it gets really annoying when a) someone thinks emulating system that has single CPU is badly done because it does not use multiple cores. b) or more cores magically make single core cpu emulation faster)

BigFan · 09 January 2015, 22:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShawnBaxe

Of course it is. 64-bit CPUs have multiple cores, which can be used by 64-bit applications. 32-bit applications can run on single-core CPUs. That can make a huge difference

As far as I know, Windows can distribute the 32-bit load between multiple cores, but still you won't get the same speed you'd have if the application was natively using more than one core.

Bullshit from first to last line. Except that smt-applications run faster on mc, this is real nonsense.

Quote:

Registers is one thing - cores significantly add to that. Using the Unreal Engine 4 source code on a daily basis, I had to learn that

My assumption is, you don't know a damn thing and you did not learn anything from it what's beyond assumption and expectation.

@Toni,
don't feel sorry. Things have to be said and cleared out before this thread get derailed with more rubbish.

It reminds me of a german user named Dennis53000 who posted same kind of ridiculous commentary in every forum he entered. Looks like eab is now plagued.

Michael Sykes · 09 January 2015, 23:31

Just to put in my two cents.Guys just get a fast CPU with good overclocking potential and fast ram to get a better PPC experience.
I'v seen it running on an old Phenom x4 II 3.1GHz and on the i7@4.3GHz with much faster ram. That was a differnce like night and day.
If you think the ppc emu is slow there is a good chance that your pc is just underpowered, old, has a bottleneck like ram/cpu or is just overall to slow, even if 68k stuff runs just fine.

*MiB Neuralyzer/on*
You don't want to disgruntle Toni he needs time to make the toccata implementation perfect.You feel the urge to get some better hardware instead for a faster ppc emulation...

*device you have never seen before/off*

fitzsteve · 13 January 2015, 15:35

Recently upgraded to one of the 8 core AMD FX CPU's (the 8350) and just tried out WinUAE PPC, OS4.1 really runs well now. I'd say for the first time emulation is faster than a real Classic Amiga. Only thing missing now native 3D support!

Great work as always Toni

Snake79 · 11 February 2015, 20:27

Hi Toni, have a question: what version of QEMU does latest betas have? Is it still 2.2.0rc3 or newer? Are you implementing latest versions of QEMU when available? If i am not wrong now its
January 22nd, 2015
QEMU version 2.1.3
Thanks!
EDIT: Properties of qemu-uae.dll says that its 2.2.0.0... Is 2.1.3 newer than 2.2.0? Dont understand the numbers of releases really...

Toni Wilen · 11 February 2015, 20:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake79

Hi Toni, have a question: what version of QEMU does latest betas have? Is it still 2.2.0rc3 or newer? Are you implementing latest versions of QEMU when available? If i am not wrong now its
January 22nd, 2015
QEMU version 2.1.3
Thanks!
EDIT: Properties of qemu-uae.dll says that its 2.2.0.0... Is 2.1.3 newer than 2.2.0? Dont understand the numbers of releases really...

2.1.3 is update to 2.1.x series. 2.2.0 is newer. (Newer QEMU version also makes no difference if there is no PPC updates)

09 January 2015, 20:34	#231
Romanujan Registered User Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Szczecin/Poland Posts: 424	Does anyone know whether the SysSpeed 2.6 MIPS/MFLOPS are good benchmarks for the emulators? I did some tests: Code: Test OS3 - 64bit OS4 - 64 bit OS4 - 32 bit 68K-MIPS 146.59 0.04 0.04 68K-MFLOPS 9.94 112.83 84.92 PPC-MIPS 54567.62 59814.01 26862.27 PPC-MFLOPS 196.79 191.43 157.19 Configurations: OS3 - 64bit - FS-UAE, Amiga OS 3.9 BB2 with lots of 3rd party patches, 68060, no JIT OS4 - 64bit - FS-UAE, Amiga OS 4.1 FE OS4 - 32bit - WinUAE, Amiga OS 4.1 FE WinUAE was version 3.00, 32-bit, running on Windows 7 64-bit FS-UAE was version 2.5.23, 64-bit, running on Gentoo Linux, compiled (both emulator and QEMU plugin) be me using GCC 4.8.3, with -march=native Host system was Core i7 4790k @ 4GHz (stock frequency), DDRAM3 1600 MHz CL10 ------- It seems the 64-bit is much faster at emulating the PPC Last edited by Romanujan; 09 January 2015 at 20:46.

09 January 2015, 21:14	#235
Toni Wilen WinUAE developer Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland Age: 49 Posts: 26,553	WTF? CPU emulator that emulates single core CPU won't and can't get ANY help whatsoever from multiple cores! Number of registers and register width causes the difference. QEMU uses 64-bit variables in many places. (EDIT: sorry about that but it gets really annoying when a) someone thinks emulating system that has single CPU is badly done because it does not use multiple cores. b) or more cores magically make single core cpu emulation faster) Last edited by Toni Wilen; 09 January 2015 at 21:33.

11 February 2015, 20:27	#239
Snake79 Registered User Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Poland Posts: 190	Hi Toni, have a question: what version of QEMU does latest betas have? Is it still 2.2.0rc3 or newer? Are you implementing latest versions of QEMU when available? If i am not wrong now its January 22nd, 2015 QEMU version 2.1.3 Thanks! EDIT: Properties of qemu-uae.dll says that its 2.2.0.0... Is 2.1.3 newer than 2.2.0? Dont understand the numbers of releases really... Last edited by Snake79; 11 February 2015 at 20:40.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
QEMU TCG as JIT replacement?	KillaByte	request.UAE Wishlist	21	30 January 2018 16:05
PPC emulation for winuae	marauder	request.UAE Wishlist	25	04 November 2014 06:13
WinUAE PPC thread	B14ck W01f	support.WinUAE	301	10 September 2014 16:34
WinUAE ppc support?	blasterreal	support.WinUAE	8	29 September 2010 00:51
PPC on WinUAE ?	glue	request.UAE Wishlist	4	28 January 2007 12:04

05 January 2015, 00:03	#221
ma693541 Computer Wizard Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Ramberg/Norway Posts: 928	Ok. So Linux 64-bit have it, but not Windows 64-bit?

05 January 2015, 00:10	#223
ma693541 Computer Wizard Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Ramberg/Norway Posts: 928	S..t. Wish the 32-bit version of WinUAE or FS-UAE with PPC CPU support can run AOS 4.1 FE Classic seamless on my brand new i7 Gameing PC then. It use Windows 8.1 64-bit.

05 January 2015, 12:25	#226
Locutus Registered User Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: Finland Posts: 1,186	I started on it, but something just feels horribly awkward to reverse engineer a tiny proprietary OS . And as Toni said, its...so...booooring..... Maybe if i'm ever stuck in a snowed in mökki i might continue with it.

06 January 2015, 20:00	#227
ShawnBaxe Posts: n/a	Alright...haven't followed the whole discussion, but I just noticed yesterday that WinUAE now has PPC emulation and boots OS 4.x, right? Quick question...I used to develop software for AmigaOS 3.x and MorphOS. Budget is tight, so I'd like to purchase a copy of OS 4.1 FE Classic and run it on WinUAE. Is the emulation a) stable and compatible enough, b) fast enough to develop applications for OS 4.x in C/C++ on WinUAE? I'd really like to support AmigaOS 4.x by developing some useful applications, but I cannot afford "real hardware" to do so. I'm running on an i7 870 @ 2.93 GHz with 16 GB RAM. Now that OS 4.1 FE Classic is very affordable I'd like to give it a shot, but compatibility, stability and speed (enough to "get the job done") are very important. Thanks And btw. great job on getting OS 4 to boot - PPC emulation is a very difficult task - especially if you want it to run at decent speed without sacrificing compatibility.

09 January 2015, 20:52	#233
Romanujan Registered User Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Szczecin/Poland Posts: 424	This has nothing to do with cores - rather with the CPU registers! I was only surprised the 64-bit is twice as fast in MIPS test...

09 January 2015, 23:31	#237
Michael Sykes WinUAE end user Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Bremen Age: 44 Posts: 649	Just to put in my two cents.Guys just get a fast CPU with good overclocking potential and fast ram to get a better PPC experience. I'v seen it running on an old Phenom x4 II 3.1GHz and on the i7@4.3GHz with much faster ram. That was a differnce like night and day. If you think the ppc emu is slow there is a good chance that your pc is just underpowered, old, has a bottleneck like ram/cpu or is just overall to slow, even if 68k stuff runs just fine. MiB Neuralyzer/on You don't want to disgruntle Toni he needs time to make the toccata implementation perfect.You feel the urge to get some better hardware instead for a faster ppc emulation... device you have never seen before/off

13 January 2015, 15:35	#238
fitzsteve Professional slacker! Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Kent, UK Age: 44 Posts: 6,685	Recently upgraded to one of the 8 core AMD FX CPU's (the 8350) and just tried out WinUAE PPC, OS4.1 really runs well now. I'd say for the first time emulation is faster than a real Classic Amiga. Only thing missing now native 3D support! Great work as always Toni

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