Denial

Version 2.0 was released today at WinUAE

Thanks! Seems to work better than the version I had installed before...

Take a look:
http://user.tninet.se/~jad615g/ibrowse.jpg

I have set the CPU Idle control completely to the right which means the emulator only uses the cpu time it needs. When the amiga is idle, it only uses 0.05% of the PCs cpu.

I got the swedish keyboard working too! Om någon är intresserad så gör man följande:

På input->tangentbord:

Byt till Configuration #1

Copy from default.

Sedan skall man ha på:

ö: Semicolon
ä: Single Quote
å: Left Bracket

Nice Workbench! I had Amiga 2000 -> 3000 -> 3000T, and even picked up a spare 500 and 1200, before getting a 4000. All between June 1988 thru September 1997, a good 10-years!! It was an awesome time to be ahead of the curve over those lame DOS and clueless Apple users -- heh.

I like what they have done with the AmigaSYS project, too. I missed having my Picasso RTG board with the Magic WB running. Then pull-down the WB screen to reveal a classic Macintosh running Word and Netscape. Then pull-down that screen to reveal my BBS running Hack & Slash. Can't touch this in 1994.

Amiga days lasted longer than my VIC 20 -> C16 -> C128 days from February 1982 - June 1988. Love my 8-bits, had a huge library, but simply outgrew its programming and yearned for more.

Of course, now, there's only Linux.

I like the Amiga 600. Small enough to fit on my coffee table and perfect for games, freeware and Easy Amos. Add a 3.1 upgrade and a hard drive and you have everything you could ever need.

I never got the hang of UAE (United Arab Emirates). The Steem Engine (Atari ST) is much more straightforward and one of the best emulators I've come across.

rhurst wrote:Nice Workbench! I had Amiga 2000 -> 3000 -> 3000T, and even picked up a spare 500 and 1200, before getting a 4000. All between June 1988 thru September 1997, a good 10-years!! It was an awesome time to be ahead of the curve over those lame DOS and clueless Apple users -- heh.

I like what they have done with the AmigaSYS project, too. I missed having my Picasso RTG board with the Magic WB running. Then pull-down the WB screen to reveal a classic Macintosh running Word and Netscape. Then pull-down that screen to reveal my BBS running Hack & Slash. Can't touch this in 1994.

Amiga days lasted longer than my VIC 20 -> C16 -> C128 days from February 1982 - June 1988. Love my 8-bits, had a huge library, but simply outgrew its programming and yearned for more.

I echo this sentiment. My Vic and C64 ownership years lasted just over four years combined, but my Amiga 500 lasted from early '88 until late '94 (just after Commodore deep-sixed); over six solid years of Amiga goodness. It was just getting more difficult and more expensive to keep up with Amiga, and since the vastly superior OS/2 Warp came out for the PC for a great price that same year, I saw no reason to continue with Amiga.

When it comes to retro computing, I still enjoy the simplicity of the Vic 20. I find that 8 bits in general hold a stronger appeal, and I would love to see a modern take on an 8 bit computer. I think the Commodore 128 was the last 8 bit designed.

PaulQ wrote: I find that 8 bits in general hold a stronger appeal.

For some reason, there are a lot more type-in programs available for 8 bit computers. 16 bit freeware always came ready made on floppy disk.

Vic-20 + C64 was my main computers for almost 4 years. Amigas has been my main computers for 9 and a half year! And since then I have been using it for music (midi) now and then until now when I'm using only a PC with Vista for everything. My best amiga is an Amiga 1200 (that I bought when it came out) + 68040 40MHz... My emulated WinUAE 68040 runs at 1.24GHz!!! (according to AIBB).

In this math test, my emulated amiga is around 40000 times faster than an Amiga 500. And my PCs CPU is only working at around 50% for this.


Note that there are numbers that are missing as they don't fit... According to this picture http://amigatimes.wz.cz/clanky/minimig/sysinfo7.jpg , an Amiga 2000 gest 711 dhrystones, so according to my calculations, there should be a 1 in front of 823.28 and a 2 in front of 409.21 for Amiga600 etc... So my emulated amiga is 2409 times faster than an A600/A500 in this test...

According to SysInfo, my emulated 68040 is 69,48 times faster than a 25MHz 68040. That should mean that my 68040 is running at 69,84*25 = ... 1.746GHz

I'm emulating a 68040 instead of a 68060 becase that makes my amiga system to crash...

I don't want this to come off as some geek contest, but I tried the same tools running the new WinUAE using an Amiga 4000 profile (68040 + chipset), but running as fastest as possible, but keeping the chipset timing.

I forgot about these benchmark tools; I remember getting the 68020 expansion card for A2000 and thought it was bad-ass, until my A3000T with Picasso card. I recall having to run a tool called DEGRADER just to run 'regular' games on those more powerful workstations.

Anyways, here's my results:





What a screamer!

I got better results than you in AIBB but worse in SysInfo. Maybe because we have different versions of the programs? Or probably more likely that we have different processors. Maybe you have an Intel? I have an AMD Athlon 5200+ X2.

Here is the same aibb screen as the one you posted:

(This time I set the cpu idle control to minimum instead of maximum)

And here is the sysinfo screen from my old PentiumII 350MHz running winuae 0.8.21 r4:

(AIBB didn't work...)

I just made a graph based on results from my own amiga benchmark program:
http://user.tninet.se/~pug510w/datormuseum/aa/wsmb.png

http://user.tninet.se/~pug510w/datormuseum/aa.html

To run an Amiga 500 as fast as my WinUAE, it would have to run at 6.94GHz!

Boray wrote:To run an Amiga 500 as fast as my WinUAE, it would have to run at 6.94GHz!

You're going to need a good heat sink for one thing...