log in | register | forums
Show:
Go:
Forums
Username:

Password:

User accounts
Register new account
Forgot password
Forum stats
List of members
Search the forums

Advanced search
Recent discussions
- DDE tools updated to DDE28c (News:)
- Orpheus hits crowdfunding target (News:2)
- Orpheus launch crowdfunding campaign (News:5)
- RISC OS interview with Jeroen Vermeulen (News:)
- PackMan in practice (News:)
- Acorn World at Cambridge computer museum, 8-9th Sept 2018 (News:1)
- August News round-up (News:)
- The state of PackMan in 2018 (News:)
- Drawing symmetrical objects symmetrically (Prog:1)
- AMCS free versions are live! (Gen:13)
Related articles
- Iconbar in update shocker!
- Wakefield 2003 - the preview
- Wakey Wakey, it's show time again!
- Rounding Up February
- 50,000 shares, Iyonix Select and a Belated Happy Birthday
- RISC OS magazines
- RISC OS 2002 show
- Wakefield 2006 show report
- RISC OS South East Show 2005
- Podcast IV - coming soon!
Latest postings RSS Feeds
RSS 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.9
Atom 0.3
Misc RDF | CDF
Site Search
 
Article archives
The Icon Bar: News and features: Alpha benchmarks, Omega tittle tattle
 

Alpha benchmarks, Omega tittle tattle

Posted by Phil Mellor on 01:46, 13/7/2003 | , , , , , , , , , ,
 
Alpha owner John McCulloch has posted some benchmarks, produced using RISCOSmark, to csa.hardware. "I got mine yesterday, it is very impressive, in all sorts of ways" says John. "It is very well made, and functioned as expected right out of the box".

The following table shows the results of the Alpha running RISCOSmark with Virtual Risc PC; John's 202Mhz Risc PC is included as a comparison, as well as the results provided on the RISCOSmark web site (note these are run in a less intensive screen mode, which is significant for computers without VRAM, such as the A7000+).

Machine (see below) Alpha SA202 SA287 A7000+ A4 Iyonix
Resolution, colour depth 1024x768, 32K 800x600, 256 (A4: 16 cols)
Processor - Looped instructions (cache) 41% 99% 141% 12% 5% 261%
Memory - Multiple register transfer 245% 98% 98% 83% 54% 201%
Rectangle Copy - Graphics acceleration test 169% 1149% 101% 66% 74% 5786%
Icon Plotting - 16 colour sprite with mask 51% 10% 117% 22% 9% 32%
Draw Path - Stroke narrow line 36% 40% 142% 16% 8% 101%
Draw Fill - Plot filled shape 50% 7% 139% 20% 10% 75%
HD Read - Block load 1MB file (Mb/sec) 99 1.8 3.3 1.9 1.3 18.0
HD Write - Block save 1MB file (Mb/sec) 66.3 0.75 3.1 2.0 1.2 13.8
FS Read - Byte stream file in (Kb/sec) 649 820 315 141 74 1101
FS Write - Byte stream file out (Kb/sec) 328 281 306 140 62 1020

Alpha 2.0GHz Celeron (VRPC) RISC OS 4.02 A7000+ 48MHz ARM7500FE, RISC OS Select 4.33
SA202 Risc PC SA 202Mhz, RISC OS Select A4 ARM3, RISC OS 3.1, 16 Colour greyscale
SA287 Risc PC SA 287MHz, RISC OS 4.02 Iyonix 600MHz, RISC OS 5.03, DMA enabled

What do the numbers mean? Well, the percentages compare the machine to a 202Mhz SA Risc PC running RISC OS 4.02 (100%). So 200% would be twice as fast as the "base machine". We haven't had chance to verify these (unofficial) figures, and it's worth remembering that benchmarks don't necessarily reflect use in the real world. Pinches of salt, and all that.

When John visited his dealer he played with a production Omega, and although he didn't run any benchmarks he "would guess it is about twice as fast as RiscPC overall till you use the disc drive, then wow it zooms."

While on the subject of MD and the Omega, Desk (MicroDigital Europe) reveal in their latest newsletter (translated) that MD had been secretly negotiating with Pace prior to Castle's purchase of RISC OS. Desk expect their first bulk shipments of Omegas this week.

Link: Alpha benchmarks
 

  Alpha benchmarks, Omega tittle tattle
  (09:10 13/7/2003)
  mavhc (10:01 13/7/2003)
    ams (13:26 13/7/2003)
      flibble (16:00 13/7/2003)
        Revin Kevin (20:30 13/7/2003)
          monkeyson2 (21:02 13/7/2003)
            jmb (22:20 13/7/2003)
              moss (22:37 13/7/2003)
                jmb (23:13 13/7/2003)
                  flibble (23:31 13/7/2003)
                    hzn (07:40 14/7/2003)
                      andrew (11:39 14/7/2003)
                        not_ginger_matt (14:21 14/7/2003)
                          not_ginger_matt (14:30 14/7/2003)
                            hzn (16:27 15/7/2003)
 
g0tay Message #92407, posted at 09:10, 13/7/2003
Unregistered user Looks like RISCOSmark doesn't do proper harddisk benchmarking as windows is getting in the way on the VirtualAcorn box with it's caches, hence the 99&66M/sec (in memory) transfers.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Mark Scholes Message #92408, posted by mavhc at 10:01, 13/7/2003, in reply to message #92407
Member
Posts: 660
Why is the SA202 much slower than the base machine, a SA202, for Icon Plotting - 16 colour sprite with mask, Draw Path - Stroke narrow line, Draw Fill - Plot filled shape?

But much faster for Rectangle Copy - Graphics acceleration test.

Viewfinder?

  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Annraoi Message #92409, posted by ams at 13:26, 13/7/2003, in reply to message #92408
Member
Posts: 56
I was thinking the harddisk figures looked a bit odd alright (as the VA uses the underlying OS (host) to do writes then windows would step in copy the write to it's own memory cache - hence the exaggerated performance).

I don't suppose that will stop MD from claiming the harddisk access of the Alpha is faster than the Iyonix ;)

Regards

Annraoi

  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Peter Howkins Message #92410, posted by flibble at 16:00, 13/7/2003, in reply to message #92409
flibble

Posts: 865
I wonder how you're getting the A4 to do 800x600 in 256, I thought the limit was 800x600 in 16 (or 640x480 in 256).
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Kevin Wells Message #92411, posted by Revin Kevin at 20:30, 13/7/2003, in reply to message #92410
Member
Posts: 644
It does state the A4 16 colours.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Phil Mellor Message #92412, posted by monkeyson2 at 21:02, 13/7/2003, in reply to message #92411
monkeyson2Please don't let them make me be a monkey butler

Posts: 12380
Well, it does more clearly now :)
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
JMB Message #92413, posted by jmb at 22:20, 13/7/2003, in reply to message #92412
Member
Posts: 467
Is there any reason why the Iyonix was tested in 800x600@256colours?
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
John Hoare Message #92414, posted by moss at 22:37, 13/7/2003, in reply to message #92413

Posts: 9346
Indeed; isn't the IYONIX supposed to be *faster* in higher colour depths? Or have I misremembered?
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
JMB Message #92415, posted by jmb at 23:13, 13/7/2003, in reply to message #92414
Member
Posts: 467
RISCOSmark 1.01 (14 May 2003)

OS/Machine/Processor: RO5.03(update27)/Iyonix/80321@600MHz
Graphics Resolution: 1024x768, 16M colours

Processor: 258%
Memory: 209%
Rectangle Copy: 1544%
Icon Plotting: 217% (no, that's not a typo)
Draw Path: 104%
Draw Fill: 65%
HD Read: 18.1
HD Write: 13.5
FS Read: 1136
FS Write: 524

Food for thought ;)

  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Peter Howkins Message #92416, posted by flibble at 23:31, 13/7/2003, in reply to message #92415
flibble

Posts: 865
Contractual Obligation Comment:

The Evil that is benchmarks

It burns my eyes.

  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Herbert zur Nedden Message #92417, posted by hzn at 07:40, 14/7/2003, in reply to message #92416
Member
Posts: 10
Wow, how did you do those IYONIX pc benchmarks? The harddisc values suggest that you accidently did them on a floppy disc...

I got
HD Read - Block load 1MB file 18249 = 611%
HD Wirte - Block save 1MB file 14054 = 462%

This is with RISC OS 5.03 and thus UDMA up and running.

  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Andrew Message #92418, posted by andrew at 11:39, 14/7/2003, in reply to message #92417
HandbagHandbag Boi
Posts: 3439
Did you say 'bullshit 'or 'bulkshipment'? ;-)
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Richard Wilson Message #92419, posted by not_ginger_matt at 14:21, 14/7/2003, in reply to message #92418
Member
Posts: 63
jmb: You've missed the differentiation between Kb/second and Mb/second. ;-)
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Richard Wilson Message #92420, posted by not_ginger_matt at 14:30, 14/7/2003, in reply to message #92419
Member
Posts: 63
And I've missed the difference between jmb and hzn. Oh well...
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Herbert zur Nedden Message #92421, posted by hzn at 16:27, 15/7/2003, in reply to message #92420
Member
Posts: 10
Thanks for the clarification. I should get myself a bigger monitor since the on-screen display is pretty small and thus (or just by being illiterate to a certain extent) I didn't see the MB/s note. Error was thus on my side. Sorry.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 

The Icon Bar: News and features: Alpha benchmarks, Omega tittle tattle