A1200, 030 VS 040, 8x, CE, Speed Comparison

Snake79 · 03 August 2014, 01:06

Hi there. I have done some tests (winuae_2820b8) and speed comparisons (using SysInfo) between Quickstart A1200 with 030 8x CE 8MB fast VS 040 8x CE 8MB fast (with FPU, because without it SysInfo is crashing). Results are confusing because the 030 config perform better and not only in synthetic benchmarks but in visual too (in using Workbench fe.) ;/ ? Is that normal ? (pics: 1a,1b 030 and 2a,2b 040).
EDIT: when using these configs without CE (Cycle exact = off) 040 is slightly faster then (see: 3a, 3b, 4a, 4b).
Are we allowed to use CE on 030/040 finally or not?

Snake79 · 03 August 2014, 14:41

Second test (030 VS 040) using PowerMeter application:
If i am not wrong then less (s) is better.
Pics: 1-3 with CE on; 4-6 with CE off.

Toni Wilen · 03 August 2014, 15:29

You are mostly wasting your time to test new beta features that are not even supposed to be finished yet.

Snake79 · 03 August 2014, 15:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toni Wilen

You are mostly wasting your time to test new beta features that are not even supposed to be finished yet.

So i understand that it is not recommended to use above configs as they are not yet optimized enough (and with CE especially)?

Snake79 · 03 August 2014, 16:00

My point was to find optimal config (as much fast and compatible as it can be like) and now i think its A1200 030 8x CE 8MB fast for me (have problems with 040).
PS. Thanks for your hard work!

Toni Wilen · 03 August 2014, 19:18

68040+ speed will be higher in future betas. 68020/030 probably does not change during this beta series, but 68030 data cache will be re-enabled. (Unless there is some other obvious bugs)

Snake79 · 03 August 2014, 20:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toni Wilen

68040+ speed will be higher in future betas. 68020/030 probably does not change during this beta series, but 68030 data cache will be re-enabled. (Unless there is some other obvious bugs)

That's Great! For now i am very happy with 030 in terms of performance and compatibility (with CE enabled!). Thanks again Guru

03 August 2014, 01:06	#1
Snake79 Registered User Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Poland Posts: 190	A1200, 030 VS 040, 8x, CE, Speed Comparison Hi there. I have done some tests (winuae_2820b8) and speed comparisons (using SysInfo) between Quickstart A1200 with 030 8x CE 8MB fast VS 040 8x CE 8MB fast (with FPU, because without it SysInfo is crashing). Results are confusing because the 030 config perform better and not only in synthetic benchmarks but in visual too (in using Workbench fe.) ;/ ? Is that normal ? (pics: 1a,1b 030 and 2a,2b 040). EDIT: when using these configs without CE (Cycle exact = off) 040 is slightly faster then (see: 3a, 3b, 4a, 4b). Are we allowed to use CE on 030/040 finally or not? Attached Thumbnails Last edited by Snake79; 03 August 2014 at 14:07.

03 August 2014, 14:41	#2
Snake79 Registered User Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Poland Posts: 190	Second test (030 VS 040) using PowerMeter application: If i am not wrong then less (s) is better. Pics: 1-3 with CE on; 4-6 with CE off. Attached Thumbnails Last edited by Snake79; 03 August 2014 at 14:53.

03 August 2014, 16:00	#5
Snake79 Registered User Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Poland Posts: 190	My point was to find optimal config (as much fast and compatible as it can be like) and now i think its A1200 030 8x CE 8MB fast for me (have problems with 040). PS. Thanks for your hard work! Last edited by Snake79; 03 August 2014 at 17:12.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
CF card speed comparison	Photon	support.Hardware	79	05 March 2014 19:36
Looking for a 030 or 040 Board	Lozspd4	MarketPlace	0	30 September 2012 23:09
Cyberstorm PPC vs Blizzard PPC CPU Speed Comparison	CU_AMiGA	support.Hardware	9	15 March 2012 14:25
A500 SCSI interface speed comparison	Photon	support.Hardware	90	02 February 2010 20:33

03 August 2014, 15:29	#3
Toni Wilen WinUAE developer Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland Age: 49 Posts: 26,574	You are mostly wasting your time to test new beta features that are not even supposed to be finished yet.

03 August 2014, 19:18	#6
Toni Wilen WinUAE developer Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland Age: 49 Posts: 26,574	68040+ speed will be higher in future betas. 68020/030 probably does not change during this beta series, but 68030 data cache will be re-enabled. (Unless there is some other obvious bugs)

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