Who's Online
114 user(s) are online (
98 user(s) are browsing
Forums )
Members: 0
Guests: 114
more...
Topic options
View mode
Newest First
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/9 21:26
#61
Just can't stay away
Joined: 2006/11/29 8:09Last Login
: Yesterday 16:37
From Lyon, France
Group:
Registered Users
@m3x
Excellent : nearly as fast in raw power than a G4 AmigaOne and 1.5 to 2x faster regarding Ram access (1.5x for Video Ram access).
Thanks for sharing !
-- AmigaONE X1000 and Radeon RX 560
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/9 21:29
#62
Home away from home
Joined: 2009/7/7 4:34Last Login
: Yesterday 2:48
From Man Cave, Canada
Group:
Registered Users
@m3x
great news
_______________________________
c64-dual sids, A1000, A1200-060@50, A4000-CSMKIII
Catweasel MK4+= Amazing
! My Master Miggies-Amiga1000 & AmigaONE X1000 !
mancave-ramblings
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/9 21:29
#63
Amigans Defender
Joined: 2006/12/2 13:27Last Login
: Today 9:55
From Taranto, Italy
Group:
Staff members Moderators Registered Users
the best is yet to come..
i'm really tired...
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/9 22:19
#64
Just can't stay away
Joined: 2006/11/24 17:54Last Login
: 11/17 22:20
From Sanremo
Group:
Registered Users
hope to see something new so
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/9 23:20
#65
Home away from home
Joined: 2006/12/2 3:55Last Login
: Today 11:46
From Italy, Perugia
Group:
Registered Users
@afxgroup
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/9 23:21
#66
Just popping in
Joined: 2010/11/6 11:13Last Login
: 2019/4/16 1:18
Group:
Registered Users
Now I'll have to do a 3D benchmark to see how performs a 460
Numbers reported are interresting, now we have to see how it performs "in real life"
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/10 1:24
#67
Quite a regular
Joined: 2008/3/11 8:29Last Login
: 2016/3/14 0:46
From Dunedin, New Zealand
Group:
Registered Users
@afxgroup
I'm not sure I know what you mean but I think you're right!
~Yes I am a Kiwi, No, I did not appear as an extra in 'Lord of the Rings'~ 1x AmigaOne X5000 2.0GHz 2gM RadeonR9280X AOS4.x 3x AmigaOne X1000 1.8GHz 2gM RadeonHD7970 AOS4.x
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/10 2:43
#69
Just popping in
Joined: 2008/9/20 23:38Last Login
: 2016/2/14 4:14
Group:
Registered Users
EDIT: the following cards are not mine but from other users in this Thread. bppc/603e@330/256mb (70ns) RAGEMEM v0.37 - compiled 11/06/2010 CPU: 603e 7.4609 @ 0 Mhz Caches Sizes: L1: 16 KB - L2: none - L3: none Cache Line: 32 ---> CPU <--- MAX MIPS: 502 ---> L1 <--- READ32: 724 MB/Sec READ64: 1162 MB/Sec WRITE32: 478 MB/Sec WRITE64: 852 MB/Sec ---> RAM <--- READ32: 41 MB/Sec READ64: 42 MB/Sec WRITE32: 23 MB/Sec WRITE64: 23 MB/Sec WRITE: 45 MB/Sec (Tricky) ---> VIDEO BUS <--- READ: 5 MB/Sec WRITE: 15 MB/Sec NOTE: Under morphos 1.4.5 w OS4Emu the results are pretty much the same except of MIPS (522) and VRAM write (22mb/sec). RAGEMEM v0.37 - compiled 11/06/2010 CPU: 604e 9.516 @ 233 Mhz Caches Sizes: L1: 32 KB - L2: none - L3: none Cache Line: 32 ---CPU--- MAX MIPS: 465 ---L1--- READ32: 882 MB/Sec READ64: 1764 MB/Sec WRITE32: 741 MB/Sec WRITE64: 1408 MB/Sec ---RAM--- READ32: 90 MB/Sec READ64: 94 MB/Sec WRITE32: 53MB/Sec WRITE64: 53MB/Sec WRITE: 86 MB/Sec (Tricky) ---VIDEO BUS--- READ: 6 MB/Sec WRITE 8MB/Sec Cyberstorm vs Blizzard video bus interesting speed will post my card when i have time. it also clear whats slowing down the Blizzard card which is no surprise.
Edited by delshay on 2010/11/10 3:00:59 Edited by delshay on 2010/11/10 3:53:03
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/10 3:36
#70
Just popping in
Joined: 2007/1/8 19:55Last Login
: 2023/7/22 17:21
Group:
Registered Users
@delshay Nice scores for your blizzard PPC. Nice work. on my 366MHz cyberstorm I put in a CVision PPC and got the following for video bus: ---> VIDEO BUS <--- READ: 5 MB/Sec WRITE: 18 MB/SEC I tried changing the ram to 60ns but it basically made no difference in the test results, about 1MB/sec faster on the L1/L2 cache but that's it. Prometheus going over Zorro gets lame write speeds (due to Zorro crap bus) ;) But the Voodoo still feels a bit faster than CVision PPC...probably way fater gfx memory on-board and faster gfx chip than CVision PPC...
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/10 3:50
#71
Just popping in
Joined: 2008/9/20 23:38Last Login
: 2016/2/14 4:14
Group:
Registered Users
@HammerD
Quote:
HammerD wrote: @delshay Nice scores for your blizzard PPC. Nice work. on my 366MHz cyberstorm I put in a CVision PPC and got the following for video bus: ---> VIDEO BUS <--- READ: 5 MB/Sec WRITE: 18 MB/SEC I tried changing the ram to 60ns but it basically made no difference in the test results, about 1MB/sec faster on the L1/L2 cache but that's it. Prometheus going over Zorro gets lame write speeds (due to Zorro crap bus) ;) But the Voodoo still feels a bit faster than CVision PPC...probably way fater gfx memory on-board and faster gfx chip than CVision PPC...its not my card its from other users in this thread. iv not yet posted my result but expect my card to be a lot faster due to very high PCI bus speed and should hold number one spot in the world for classic amiga PPC card.
you wiil need to compare your results with other Cyberstorm users.
Edited by delshay on 2010/11/10 4:07:30 Edited by delshay on 2010/11/10 4:08:15 Edited by delshay on 2010/11/10 4:10:43
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/10 3:51
#72
Home away from home
Joined: 2006/12/2 3:55Last Login
: Today 11:46
From Italy, Perugia
Group:
Registered Users
My test
RAGEMEM v0.37 - compiled 11/06/2010
CPU: AMCC PPC440EP 1.3 @ 799 Mhz
Caches Sizes: L1: 32 KB - L2: none - L3: none
Cache Line: 128
---> CPU <---
MAX MIPS: 1599
---> L1 <---
READ32: 2841 MB/Sec
READ64: 5636 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 2852 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 5674 MB/Sec
---> RAM <---
READ32: 277 MB/Sec
READ64: 277 MB/Sec
WRITE32: 164 MB/Sec
WRITE64: 164 MB/Sec
WRITE: 895 MB/Sec (Tricky)
---> VIDEO BUS <---
READ: 14 MB/Sec
WRITE: 50 MB/Sec
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/10 9:21
#73
Just popping in
Joined: 2009/2/26 11:53Last Login
: 2022/8/2 15:25
Group:
Registered Users
@m3x there is some SAM Flex (with the same MHz) that have different value in : ex : SAMO79 ---> L1 <--- WRITE32: 2852 MB/Sec WRITE64: 5674 MB/Sec Daniel ---> L1 <--- WRITE32: 185 MB/Sec WRITE64: 370 MB/Sec Is there an explanation ?
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/10 9:48
#74
Not too shy to talk
Joined: 2006/11/27 15:55Last Login
: 9/24 21:33
From SYS:Prefs/
Group:
Registered Users
@m3x Nice results for the little beast!
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/10 10:03
#75
Just can't stay away
Joined: 2006/11/29 8:09Last Login
: Yesterday 16:37
From Lyon, France
Group:
Registered Users
@shadowsun
I think there is a bug in RageMem which prevents it to calculate the correct L1 cache speed on some systms (it gives approximately the same speed as the RAM's). The same bug occurs with the Sam460 if you check carefully.
Crisot : go back to work
-- AmigaONE X1000 and Radeon RX 560
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/10 12:15
#76
Just popping in
Joined: 2006/12/1 12:20Last Login
: Today 8:44
From Anzio (Rome), Italy
Group:
Registered Users
@shadowsun
please try RamSpeed from OS4depot and report your results.
http://os4depot.net/share/utility/benchmark/ramspeed.lha
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/11 4:02
#77
Just popping in
Joined: 2007/1/8 19:55Last Login
: 2023/7/22 17:21
Group:
Registered Users
@m3x Cyberstorm PPC 366MHz Amiga 4000, OS 4 5.Workbench:> ramspeed -b2 -g1 -m1 RAMspeed (UNIX) v2.3.0 by Rhett M. Hollander (Alasir Enterprises), 2002-04 1Gb per pass mode INTEGER & READING 1 Kb block: 1312.82 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 2 Kb block: 1280.00 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 4 Kb block: 1312.82 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 8 Kb block: 1312.82 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 16 Kb block: 1383.78 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 32 Kb block: 1219.05 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 64 Kb block: 95.34 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 128 Kb block: 95.17 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 256 Kb block: 95.34 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 512 Kb block: 95.34 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 1024 Kb block: 94.46 Mb/s 5.Workbench:> ramspeed -b3 -g1 -m1 RAMspeed (UNIX) v2.3.0 by Rhett M. Hollander (Alasir Enterprises), 2002-04 1Gb per pass mode INTEGER Copy: 70.96 Mb/s INTEGER Scale: 70.52 Mb/s INTEGER Add: 79.34 Mb/s INTEGER Triad: 76.30 Mb/s --- INTEGER AVERAGE: 74.28 Mb/s 5.Workbench:> ramspeed -b1 -g1 -m1 RAMspeed (UNIX) v2.3.0 by Rhett M. Hollander (Alasir Enterprises), 2002-04 1Gb per pass mode INTEGER & WRITING 1 Kb block: 1280.00 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 2 Kb block: 1248.78 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 4 Kb block: 1219.05 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 8 Kb block: 1248.78 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 16 Kb block: 1248.78 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 32 Kb block: 1137.78 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 64 Kb block: 54.82 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 128 Kb block: 54.64 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 256 Kb block: 54.70 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 512 Kb block: 54.70 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 1024 Kb block: 54.41 Mb/s 5.Workbench:>
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/11 7:06
#78
Just popping in
Joined: 2010/11/6 11:13Last Login
: 2019/4/16 1:18
Group:
Registered Users
@HammerD
---> L1 <---
INTEGER & READING 32 Kb block: 1219.05 Mb/s
READ32: 1386 MB/Sec
INTEGER & WRITING 32 Kb block: 1137.78 Mb/s
WRITE32: 1163 MB/Sec
---> RAM <---
INTEGER & READING 1024 Kb block: 94.46 Mb/s
READ32: 98 MB/Sec
INTEGER & WRITING 1024 Kb block: 54.41 Mb/s
WRITE32: 56 MB/Sec
Quite the same results
Normal, anyway.
Waiting for a Sam440 result, to see where the cache problem is. Sam, or my code.
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/11 16:52
#79
Just popping in
Joined: 2009/2/26 11:53Last Login
: 2022/8/2 15:25
Group:
Registered Users
5.RAM Disk:> ramspeed -b 1 RAMspeed (UNIX) v2.3.0 by Rhett M. Hollander (Alasir Enterprises), 2002-04 4Gb per pass mode INTEGER & WRITING 1 Kb block: 165.29 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 2 Kb block: 165.29 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 4 Kb block: 165.16 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 8 Kb block: 165.03 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 16 Kb block: 165.16 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 32 Kb block: 165.29 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 64 Kb block: 165.03 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 128 Kb block: 164.76 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 256 Kb block: 164.23 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 512 Kb block: 164.23 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 1024 Kb block: 163.84 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 2048 Kb block: 162.93 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 4096 Kb block: 163.06 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 8192 Kb block: 163.06 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 16384 Kb block: 162.93 Mb/s 5.RAM Disk:> ramspeed -b 2 RAMspeed (UNIX) v2.3.0 by Rhett M. Hollander (Alasir Enterprises), 2002-04 4Gb per pass mode INTEGER & READING 1 Kb block: 2844.44 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 2 Kb block: 2925.71 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 4 Kb block: 2925.71 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 8 Kb block: 2925.71 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 16 Kb block: 2968.12 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 32 Kb block: 2659.74 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 64 Kb block: 276.38 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 128 Kb block: 275.27 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 256 Kb block: 270.18 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 512 Kb block: 270.18 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 1024 Kb block: 270.18 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 2048 Kb block: 270.54 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 4096 Kb block: 270.54 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 8192 Kb block: 270.54 Mb/s INTEGER & READING 16384 Kb block: 270.18 Mb/s 5.RAM Disk:> ramspeed -b 3 RAMspeed (UNIX) v2.3.0 by Rhett M. Hollander (Alasir Enterprises), 2002-04 4Gb per pass mode INTEGER Copy: 191.76 Mb/s INTEGER Scale: 189.89 Mb/s INTEGER Add: 198.00 Mb/s INTEGER Triad: 180.07 Mb/s --- INTEGER AVERAGE: 189.93 Mb/s 5.RAM Disk:> ramspeed -b 4 RAMspeed (UNIX) v2.3.0 by Rhett M. Hollander (Alasir Enterprises), 2002-04 4Gb per pass mode FL-POINT & WRITING 1 Kb block: 330.32 Mb/s FL-POINT & WRITING 2 Kb block: 330.86 Mb/s FL-POINT & WRITING 4 Kb block: 330.32 Mb/s FL-POINT & WRITING 8 Kb block: 330.32 Mb/s FL-POINT & WRITING 16 Kb block: 330.86 Mb/s FL-POINT & WRITING 32 Kb block: 330.86 Mb/s FL-POINT & WRITING 64 Kb block: 330.32 Mb/s FL-POINT & WRITING 128 Kb block: 329.79 Mb/s FL-POINT & WRITING 256 Kb block: 327.16 Mb/s FL-POINT & WRITING 512 Kb block: 327.16 Mb/s FL-POINT & WRITING 1024 Kb block: 326.11 Mb/s FL-POINT & WRITING 2048 Kb block: 322.52 Mb/s FL-POINT & WRITING 4096 Kb block: 323.03 Mb/s FL-POINT & WRITING 8192 Kb block: 323.03 Mb/s FL-POINT & WRITING 16384 Kb block: 322.52 Mb/s 5.RAM Disk:> ramspeed -b 5 RAMspeed (UNIX) v2.3.0 by Rhett M. Hollander (Alasir Enterprises), 2002-04 4Gb per pass mode FL-POINT & READING 1 Kb block: 1969.23 Mb/s FL-POINT & READING 2 Kb block: 1988.35 Mb/s FL-POINT & READING 4 Kb block: 1988.35 Mb/s FL-POINT & READING 8 Kb block: 1988.35 Mb/s FL-POINT & READING 16 Kb block: 1988.35 Mb/s FL-POINT & READING 32 Kb block: 1780.87 Mb/s FL-POINT & READING 64 Kb block: 228.32 Mb/s FL-POINT & READING 128 Kb block: 226.80 Mb/s FL-POINT & READING 256 Kb block: 224.07 Mb/s FL-POINT & READING 512 Kb block: 224.32 Mb/s FL-POINT & READING 1024 Kb block: 224.56 Mb/s FL-POINT & READING 2048 Kb block: 224.56 Mb/s FL-POINT & READING 4096 Kb block: 224.81 Mb/s FL-POINT & READING 8192 Kb block: 224.81 Mb/s FL-POINT & READING 16384 Kb block: 224.32 Mb/s 5.RAM Disk:> ramspeed -b 6 RAMspeed (UNIX) v2.3.0 by Rhett M. Hollander (Alasir Enterprises), 2002-04 4Gb per pass mode FL-POINT Copy: 353.10 Mb/s FL-POINT Scale: 324.05 Mb/s FL-POINT Add: 276.88 Mb/s FL-POINT Triad: 277.01 Mb/s --- FL-POINT AVERAGE: 307.76 Mb/s
Re: ragemem benchmark results thread !
Posted on:
2010/11/11 17:51
#80
Just popping in
Joined: 2006/12/1 12:20Last Login
: Today 8:44
From Anzio (Rome), Italy
Group:
Registered Users
@shadowsun
Quote:
INTEGER & WRITING 1 Kb block: 165.29 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 2 Kb block: 165.29 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 4 Kb block: 165.16 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 8 Kb block: 165.03 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 16 Kb block: 165.16 Mb/s INTEGER & WRITING 32 Kb block: 165.29 Mb/s Thanks for the test, indeed it seems there is a misconfiguration on your machine.
Could you please try running the little executable from here:
http://www.sam4x0.com/files/mmucr.lha and try Crisot test again?
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread:
1
(
0 members
and 1 Anonymous Users
)