MorphOS on AmigaOne X5000?
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    Doffo
    Posts: 478 from 2010/10/14
    From: Nevada
    I just made a video instead to show what all I could squeeze out of an MDD G4 Mac @ 1.5 GHz and a Radeon 9600 card. Least to show we are on the same page as to what demo was benchmarked.

    If you can sometime, make a video of your setup doing the quake 3 demo.

    Quake III Benchmark Mac MDD @ 1.5 GHz w/ Radeon 9600
    -=-=-=-
    YUUUP!
  • »22.08.18 - 05:35
    Profile Visit Website
  • Caterpillar
    Caterpillar
    outrun1978
    Posts: 28 from 2018/7/8
    Well i have just run this now on my X5000 set up in MorphOS3.11

    Using a Sapphire X1650Pro 512MB run under following perameters if this helps to dissect any scores further...

    setenv TGLSYNC 0
    flushlib tinygl.library

    In Quake 3
    r_primitives 2
    timedemo 1
    demo four

    GL Driver default
    GL Extensions ON
    Colour Depth Default
    Fullscreen ON
    Lighting: Lightmap
    Geometric DetaIl: Medium
    Texture Quality 32 bit
    Texture Filter: Trilinear.


    640x480 resolution 1260 frames 6.5 seconds 193.8fps
    800x600 resolution 1260 frames 8.0 seconds 158.4fps
    1024x768 resolution 1260 frames 10.5 seconds 120.3 fps
    1280x1024 resolution 1260 frames 14.21 seconds 88.9 fps





    [ Edited by outrun1978 22.08.2018 - 10:04 ]
  • »22.08.18 - 10:00
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    Spectre660
    Posts: 257 from 2015/6/30
    My AmigaOS 4.1FE result is for demo four.

    1280x1024 = 104.9fps

    Quote:

    Doffo wrote:
    To be sure what demo, demo four or demo001 or which one did you use?

    The person Kas1e, only claims 40 or so fps on demo four? I will just have to make some videos and upload them. Both my MDD G4 and G5 GHz did basically the same on a Radeon 9600. 41 FPS on the 1.5GHz MDD, and 44 on the G5 2 GHz on 1600x1200.




    [ Edited by Spectre660 22.08.2018 - 06:51 ]
  • »22.08.18 - 10:33
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    Doffo
    Posts: 478 from 2010/10/14
    From: Nevada
    Quote:

    outrun1978 wrote:
    Well i have just run this now on my X5000 set up in MorphOS3.11

    Using a Sapphire X1650Pro 512MB run under following perameters if this helps to dissect any scores further...

    setenv TGLSYNC 0
    flushlib tinygl.library

    In Quake 3
    r_primitives 2
    timedemo 1
    demo four

    GL Driver default
    GL Extensions ON
    Colour Depth Default
    Fullscreen ON
    Lighting: Lightmap
    Geometric DetaIl: Medium
    Texture Quality 32 bit
    Texture Filter: Trilinear.


    640x480 resolution 1260 frames 6.5 seconds 193.8fps
    800x600 resolution 1260 frames 8.0 seconds 158.4fps
    1024x768 resolution 1260 frames 10.5 seconds 120.3 fps
    1280x1024 resolution 1260 frames 14.21 seconds 88.9 fps






    That helps. Thanks. I will give it a try later today.
    -=-=-=-
    YUUUP!
  • »22.08.18 - 10:52
    Profile Visit Website
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    Doffo
    Posts: 478 from 2010/10/14
    From: Nevada
    Quote:

    Spectre660 wrote:
    My AmigaOS 4.1FE result is for demo four.

    1280x1024 = 104.9fps





    Thanks again. Later on ill get on my MDD to see.
    -=-=-=-
    YUUUP!
  • »22.08.18 - 10:53
    Profile Visit Website
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Andreas_Wolf
    Posts: 11052 from 2003/5/22
    From: Germany
    > OS4 has 3D support finally with Warp3D Nova, right?

    Why "finally"?
  • »22.08.18 - 20:48
    Profile
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Andreas_Wolf
    Posts: 11052 from 2003/5/22
    From: Germany
    > GLES4 wrapper

    ...or GL4ES :-)
  • »22.08.18 - 20:54
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    Spectre660
    Posts: 257 from 2015/6/30
    @Andreas_Wolf

    Names get twisted when I reply late pm or early am :-) .
  • »22.08.18 - 21:10
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    Doffo
    Posts: 478 from 2010/10/14
    From: Nevada
    Quote:

    Spectre660 wrote:

    My Settings


    I am slacking a bit. I unearthed all of my AGP PC hardware to setup so that if I need to reflash AGP cards back to their PC bios counterparts, then I can. I found a 9800 Pro 128MB AGP card I had flashed 4+ years ago. Can't remember if or why I stopped using it. Something about the smaller bios's being problematic. All is well. Sooner or later I will report back with another video.
    -=-=-=-
    YUUUP!
  • »23.08.18 - 05:42
    Profile Visit Website
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    Spectre660
    Posts: 257 from 2015/6/30
    Don't know what happened but getting much lower scores today.
    So my new scores X5000/20 .

    1280x1024 = 71.20fps
    1600x1200 = 66.90fps
  • »23.08.18 - 13:59
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    Doffo
    Posts: 478 from 2010/10/14
    From: Nevada
    Squeezed out 60.1 FPS on 1280x1024. I am still on the Radeon 9600.

    Hoping I have a GPU heatsink for the 9800. I removed it from the card years ago and only found the card itself. Least I know it is working, but again, it either struggled with the shrunk bios or just locked up playing. But its fun trying out the stuff again.
    -=-=-=-
    YUUUP!
  • »23.08.18 - 21:59
    Profile Visit Website
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    Spectre660
    Posts: 257 from 2015/6/30
    I had accidentally set the Geometric Detail setting to High.
    Reset to Medium

    1600x1200=102.7fps

    May be a bug with the .config file as I am getting the 102.7 fps again with the Geometric Detail back at High.

    [ Edited by Spectre660 23.08.2018 - 19:17 ]
  • »23.08.18 - 23:12
    Profile
  • Paladin of the Pegasos
    Paladin of the Pegasos
    redrumloa
    Posts: 1420 from 2003/4/13
    Quote:

    Spectre660 wrote:
    I had accidentally set the Geometric Detail setting to High.
    Reset to Medium

    1600x1200=102.7fps

    May be a bug with the .config file as I am getting the 102.7 fps again with the Geometric Detail back at High.


    This post makes no sense and is contradicting itself a couple times. Probably best to make a video of you running the test demo from soup to nuts.

    Anyhow, I have a Radeon FireGL x3 on the way. I'll bench my G5 next week when it gets here.

    [ Edited by redrumloa 23.08.2018 - 22:07 ]
  • »24.08.18 - 03:07
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    Spectre660
    Posts: 257 from 2015/6/30
    I have very slow upload bandwidth so I no video upload.

    Today's benchmark produces 95.9 in 1600x1200 .

    Settings
  • »24.08.18 - 11:20
    Profile
  • Jim
  • Yokemate of Keyboards
    Yokemate of Keyboards
    Jim
    Posts: 4913 from 2009/1/28
    From: Delaware, USA
    Quote:

    redrumloa wrote:
    Quote:

    Spectre660 wrote:
    I had accidentally set the Geometric Detail setting to High.
    Reset to Medium

    1600x1200=102.7fps

    May be a bug with the .config file as I am getting the 102.7 fps again with the Geometric Detail back at High.


    This post makes no sense and is contradicting itself a couple times. Probably best to make a video of you running the test demo from soup to nuts.

    Anyhow, I have a Radeon FireGL x3 on the way. I'll bench my G5 next week when it gets here.


    FireGL X3 requires a re-flashed bios, and can be tricky to implement.
    It might be the o my card to require this (unless you consider PC cards like the X800XT or 9800).
    "Never attribute to malice what can more readily explained by incompetence"
  • »24.08.18 - 23:05
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    Doffo
    Posts: 478 from 2010/10/14
    From: Nevada
    I can only get 55FPS on a x1650 at 1600x1200. Max geometric detail, slider all the way to the right for texture detail, Tri etc...

    Also, makes you are demo-ing with a MAX playable screen size. Once in a game, you can adjust it + and - keys on your keyboard. Max it out. You can easily get 20+ more FPS shrinking the playable screen area lol. (Or just make sure screen size is on the max through the Display option.)

    This is why videos are important from the time you click it on it on your desktop and showing the configuration after the demo. :) ;)

    Anywho, redrumloa laid the lumber with his setup.

    [ Edited by Doffo 24.08.2018 - 19:47 ]
    -=-=-=-
    YUUUP!
  • »25.08.18 - 00:29
    Profile Visit Website
  • Paladin of the Pegasos
    Paladin of the Pegasos
    redrumloa
    Posts: 1420 from 2003/4/13
    Quote:

    Spectre660 wrote:
    I have very slow upload bandwidth so I no video upload.

    Today's benchmark produces 95.9 in 1600x1200 .

    Settings


    I got a chance to go out to my workshop today and do a benchmark because of curiosity. Here's my setup on the desk.

    PowerMac G5 @ 2.3Ghz
    Ati Radeon X800

    One thing I found out on this setup is in quake lower screen resolutions gave me lower FPS than higher resolutions. Go figure. Anyhow at 1600x1200 and EVERYTHING maxed out I got 114.9 fps.

    Some time next week my Radeon FireGL x3 will come in. I'll load that into the G5 2.7 Ghz and redo the benchmark. My current monitor for my PowerMac doesn't like to go over 1600x1200. I'll either have to buy a new one or borrow one from one of my PCs. I'm thinking the 2.7 with FireGL x3 will fly even at 1080p.

    Will update next week.


    [ Edited by redrumloa 24.08.2018 - 19:40 ]
  • »25.08.18 - 00:33
    Profile
  • Paladin of the Pegasos
    Paladin of the Pegasos
    redrumloa
    Posts: 1420 from 2003/4/13
    Quote:

    Jim wrote:

    FireGL X3 requires a re-flashed bios, and can be tricky to implement.
    It might be the o my card to require this (unless you consider PC cards like the X800XT or 9800).


    The seller I am buying it from already flashed it. He's sold quite a number of these and has a very good seller rating. I should be fine :-)

    -Edit-
    If it benches worse than the X800, I'll return it. He advertises it as the fastest gfx card for a G5 AGP model.

    [ Edited by redrumloa 24.08.2018 - 19:43 ]
  • »25.08.18 - 00:34
    Profile
  • ASiegel
    Posts: 1234 from 2003/2/15
    From: Central Europe
    Quote:

    redrumloa wrote:
    If it benches worse than the X800, I'll return it. He advertises it as the fastest gfx card for a G5 AGP model.

    Simply put, the FireGL-x3 is a relabelled X800 (same chip, same memory, etc). There should not be much of a difference between both cards while running MorphOS.
  • »25.08.18 - 09:14
    Profile
  • Paladin of the Pegasos
    Paladin of the Pegasos
    redrumloa
    Posts: 1420 from 2003/4/13
    Quote:

    ASiegel wrote:

    Simply put, the FireGL-x3 is a relabelled X800 (same chip, same memory, etc). There should not be much of a difference between both cards while running MorphOS.


    Hmm, reading the specs of both it seems you are correct. I wonder why I've seen on other sites claiming it is faster than X800?

    Also, looking more at the specs of various Radeon AGP cards with 3D under MorphOS, the x1950pro has higher gpu and ram speed? Is it the fastest AGP option and not the X800/FireGL x3?

    -Edit- searching this forum and Google it seems it is faster, but those x1950pro boards are flaky. Hmm...

    [ Edited by redrumloa 26.08.2018 - 00:39 ]
  • »26.08.18 - 05:04
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    Doffo
    Posts: 478 from 2010/10/14
    From: Nevada
    One thing is for sure, we can all agree the Tabor had no chance in hell to even compete in this or was able to benchmark anything close while running OS4. ;) But then again, who would ever be dull enough to ever purchase that catastrophe called a Tabor?!?!?!? :)
    -=-=-=-
    YUUUP!
  • »26.08.18 - 07:57
    Profile Visit Website
  • Paladin of the Pegasos
    Paladin of the Pegasos
    redrumloa
    Posts: 1420 from 2003/4/13
    Quote:

    Doffo wrote:
    One thing is for sure, we can all agree the Tabor had no chance in hell to even compete in this or was able to benchmark anything close while running OS4. ;) But then again, who would ever be dull enough to ever purchase that catastrophe called a Tabor?!?!?!? :)



    I guess that's why it seems to have quietly died on the vine.
  • »26.08.18 - 08:01
    Profile
  • Order of the Butterfly
    Order of the Butterfly
    Spectre660
    Posts: 257 from 2015/6/30
    Only Tabor Benchmark released thus far was for Tower57 .

    Link
  • »26.08.18 - 13:03
    Profile
  • MorphOS Developer
    zukow
    Posts: 556 from 2005/2/9
    From: Poland
    Sadly, Tower57 is written in strange way that it needs PCIe machines (*) to get decent FPS. It runs very fast on my PCIe G5 and way slower on my AGP G5. So in fact, this benchmark tells nothing.



    (*) Sam460 is so slow that even having pcie it's slower than anything :)
  • »26.08.18 - 14:35
    Profile Visit Website