|
|
|
|
| Welcome, Guest | Home | Search | Login | Register | |
|
Profile Info |
|
| Summary | Show Posts |
| Show Posts | |
| This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to. | |
| Messages - Deer Steak | |
|
1
Hardware / Performa 550 Upgrades
November 03, 2006, 21:15 |
Thanks, Dan. Yes, that's exactly what I was getting at. I'd definitely shop elsewhere. |
|
2
Hardware / Performa 550 Upgrades
November 02, 2006, 00:48 |
just perusing We Love Macs, I can't begin to imagine how they've stayed in business. iMac G4 800 with a 15" screen for $500 is retarded, let alone the "regular price" of $800. Pioneer DVR-107's for over $200? Nonsense. |
|
3
New Member Welcome / hello
October 22, 2006, 22:05 |
ah, my kingdom for an edit button...*sigh* |
|
4
New Member Welcome / hello
October 22, 2006, 22:04 |
Welcome! If you have no way to make a system7 disk of any sort, you might be able to pick some up from <a href=http://stn2.headgap.com>this site</a> though considering 7.5.3 is *free* I'd consider trying to find another way to get it. Will the CD-ROM in that thing read burned discs? It's a long shot, but you might be able to get the files downloaded from Apple and burned to a CD-ROM, but that's only really possible if you have another Mac. |
|
5
Software / MiniBench Scores
October 15, 2006, 05:52 |
The same machine gets a 124 on OS 8.6 running SheepShaver. Pretty impressive, given my iMac 800's 176. |
|
6
Classifieds / I have a ton of legacy macs for sale.
October 14, 2006, 16:52 |
Oh, BTW...I'm going to be in the Round Lake area the weekend of 10/27. I'm seriously considering one of the AIO G3's, and could pick up locally. |
|
7
Classifieds / I have a ton of legacy macs for sale.
October 14, 2006, 16:50 |
Looks like you want the 575: http://lowendmac.com/quadra/q605.shtml http://lowendmac.com/500/lc575.shtml |
|
8
Software / MiniBench Scores
October 14, 2006, 16:01 |
Basilisk II on an Intel Mini using the 68040 JIT compiler |
|
9
Operating System / 7.5.3 Network and file sharing questions
October 13, 2006, 03:57 |
Depending on what those PowerMacs are, I'd look at dumping a ROM from one of them so you *can* emulate them legally. SheepShaver, while terribly user-hostile, is at least usable, and can run 7.5.3. |
|
10
Software / MiniBench Scores
October 10, 2006, 13:56 |
I've done it in Classic and 9.2.2 on that iMac and my score was within one or two points, so it's not having adverse effects on this machine. The eMac 1.25 I posted earlier was in Classic as well, because it's X only. |
|
11
Software / MiniBench Scores
October 10, 2006, 03:53 |
I'd be really interested in seeing a 2GHz G5 probably only hit about 200 or so on this benchmark, because one operation depends on the one before it. But there's your 21-stage pipeline at work. It'd be about as fast at this as a 6-year-old high-end B&W G3. Unfortunately for Dan, it'd also kill the usefulness of the MiniBench. OTOH, I'm not capable of doing what he did; I'm no programmer. |
|
12
Software / MiniBench Scores
October 10, 2006, 03:50 |
I think I figured out that issue earlier when I talk about my iMac. http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/ppc-1.ars/1 The PowerPC used a 4-stage pipeline from the 601 through the original G4 (7400/7410). Then Motorola broke with that tradition, almost doubling the length of the processing pipeline with the G4e, making it 7 stages. We're talking about a 75% lengthening, which also means that, all else being equal, it takes a 75% faster CPU to match a 7400/7410 G4. That means a 500MHz G4 7410 is roughly as fast as a 775MHz G4e. The G3 and G4 variants are covered here: http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/ppc-2.ars/1 I really don't see any other compelling arguements as to why an 800MHz machine is nearly outperformed by a 466MHz machine. The G4 was on both ends of the Megahertz Myth. Had Motorola merely applied some processing tweaks and shrunk the feature size of the G4e, we'd have barely seen 1GHz G4's, but they'd be every bit as fast as 1.42GHz Mac Minis. |
|
13
Emulation / SheepShaver
October 09, 2006, 16:35 |
MoL was ported to OS X, but it was ported for 10.3, and system changes for 10.4 render it unusable in Tiger. There was never any sound support in the OS X port. Then there was a port of THAT called Mac-on-Mac which made it more friendly but it doesn't work on Tiger, either. |
|
14
Software / MiniBench Scores
October 09, 2006, 16:30 |
I don't think it's that, either. Dan's 400MHz G3 in an 8600 (so that's what, a 40MHz bus) scored a 138. My 333MHz Beige G3 scored 113. That's strictly by-the-books there. If you set yourself up a little cross-multiplying table there 400/333 = 138/? you get 114.9. That's less than a 1% difference in what I got, something I consider within the margin of error. But the bus is like 35% faster on the Beige, so if it was RAM enough to saturate the memory bus, I'd think the beige would score higher than linear. It's certainly not hitting the hard drive, so my process of elimination says that it's small enough to fit in the 32k L1 on the 603e, and the 64k L1 on the G3 is positively spacious by comparison. And that's excellent news for PowerPC - Dan's program is calculating one variable over and over, re-using the same memory address. That's exactly what cache was built for. |
|
15
Software / MiniBench Scores
October 07, 2006, 21:10 |
Macintosh LC III - 0.2 I think my two Powerbook results are interesting. They are completely the same software-wise, aside from the 3400 having to use the PB-specific release of the software, vs. the 1400 having a vanilla install. They have the same 512k disk cache, the same 24MB virtual memory setting, the same amount of RAM, both run with no open apps, the same versions of all software, so the difference is in the memory bus speed (33MHz on the 1400 vs 40MHz on the 3400) and in CPU speed/cache. Powerbook 1400cs 117 running 7.6.1 with 16MB RAM (603e cacheless) - 34.6 Powerbook 3400c 180 running 7.6.1 with 16MB RAM (603e 512k L2) - 53.7 Estimated 180MHz 603e with no cache in 7.6.1 (calculated using the 117MHz) - 53.2 L2 cache speedup - almost nill. Maybe even more interesting in the Power Macintosh 5500 results below, because now it's the exact same piece of hardware, the difference being the L2 cache being either installed or removed. FWIW, 7.6.1 is super snappy with it either way, though web browsing enjoys the extra cache. Power Macintosh 5500/225 with 32MB running 7.6.1 (603e, 256k L2) - 67.3 Power Macintosh 5500/225 with 32MB running 7.6.1 (603e, L2 cache removed) - 67.0 This is the nail in the coffin for L2 cache having an effect on PowerPC, IMO. The 68k's have a much smaller L1 cache - the Powerbook 540c listed above and my LC III both have a measly 8k L1 cache, so an L2 might have a more profound effect. Unfortunately, I'm unwilling to spend the money on a Mac that can use a cache card - and the cache card itself. LOL |
| Pages: [1] 2 | |
|
© 2021 System7Today.com. |
