home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
- > > Well , I can't say that I care that much about MiNT either. What about MagiC 4 then?
- > > Have anyone tried it? Daniel said that MagiC works but MagiC Desk doesn't.
- >
- > I think the AB is fine so long as you don't touch the MMU - which is a problem since
- > setting up the cache and FastRAM kind of depends on that...
- >
- > It just means you need to be careful when adapting the driver software to work
- > with Magic & MINT. I'll worry about all that when I am happy with the drivers
- > on a non-multitasking machine. It's quite hard to patch all the incompatible parts
- > of TOS as it is...
-
- I can see that. I wouldn't be able to do anythig in this department my self. It's good
- to know that there is people like you out there that can sort out the all the problems.
-
- :-)
-
- > > A little boring to burn along at lightspeed and not be able to multitask! :-|
- >
- > Multitasking is fine if you can rely on it, but it seems MiNT & Magic still need
- > work in this department. I heard things like LHarc don't like Magic very much,
- > which is strange considering how simple it is system-wise.
-
- I have almost no problems what so ever with MagiC. I think it's very stable not far
- behind TOS 4.04 at all, maybe even as good. It only crashes when you run some poor
- old software and LHarc is not one of those. I had some problems with version 4.01
- of MagiC, but with 4.02 it works wonderful and is faster than TOS 4.04. I can't
- see why there shuld be problems with LHarc as I use it almost every day.
- Bad Mood works perfectly with MagiC and so does Apex and most other programs I use.
-
- What will not run is mostly games and demos.
-
- > > I guess a graphics card would do wonders. :-)
- >
- > Yep.
-
- Would be interesting to see some figures on how AB works together with the Nova card.
- Speedddyy... :-)
-
- > > > Integer is slow too.
- >
- > > What? At 410% for a divide? That's amazing Magnus! The divide is the one thing
- > > that's almost impossible to optimise as you can't do a parallel version. If the
- > > divide is this fast, it's a good sign for everything else! :)
- >
- > > But... okey. I just thought it was slow because of the other tests... but it's only
- > > about twice the speed of an TT, or?
- >
- > What I'm trying to say is that you can't really improve much on the 68030's
- > divide - beyond doubling it's speed. The 68040 doubles it's speed! GEMBench
- > shouldn't be basing it's integer tests on a divide, as it's the least likely
- > instruction to change between chips. The fact that it has doubled means the
- > chip is damned impressive. :)
-
- I get your point. :-)
-
- > Do you see what I mean? The details are not clear, but GEMBench is just not
- > a very well balanced way of judging speeds of chips. If you know about the
- > divide, you can see that the improvement is actually quite significant.
-
- Okey, I think I missed something on the way. So gembench does only test divide
- and that's not realy fair to judge a CPU, right! :-)
-
- Why can't anyone do a decent speedtest program, like your DSP-rating program??
-
- > > I think the divide is quite impressive myself...
- >
- > > I take your word for it.
- >
- > Thanks. :)
-
- Okeydokey. :-)
-
- > > I'm still running mine at 32Mhz as I don't have my RC-33 yet... :(
- >
- > RC-33? Do you mean a 33MHz 040??
- >
- > Yep. I still only have an over-clocked RC-25. :(
-
- :-((
-
- Can't they be bought cheap from a MAC reapair firm? They should have old scrapped
- motherboards laying around that could be stripped of some CPU's.
-
- //magnus Kollberg
-
-