»

[AmigaMance]

I know that many people have asked this question in the past, but back then, only a few OS4 beta testers could give an answer and only those who were not running OS4 on a mediator-based Amiga or AGA. (Not supported by MOS)
Now, there should be many Amiga users who can run both OS's on IDENTICAL hardware (A1200/3000/4000) and hence give a definite answer!
Which OS is the fastest then?! OS4 or MOS? I read on many posts that MOS has a faster 68k emulation by far (and also much more compatible) and that OS4 generally feels faster/snappier as a desktop etc. I suppose both claims are true?

Since MOS has faster 68k emulation, (from what i hear) i think it would be a fair method of speed comparison to test WarpOS/PUP apps on both OS's and see where they perform better. For example: In which OS do you get less frame-skipping from FroggerNG or AMP? (WOS or PUP versions) NOTE: BPPC users with SCSI should copy the movie file in RAM: or on a IDE media for a fair comparison
In which OS do you get more FPS from HW demanding, PPC native games like HereticII/Shogo/WipeOut and the like?
What SysSpeed has to say about it? If it runs ok on both OSes, of course.

[Nickman]

Funny enough WOS and PUP software doesnt run on OS4.

[AmigaMance]

What are you talking about? Then how all these OS4 users run Heretic 2 on their A1?

[A1260]

aos4 win easly over the slower and now outdated morphos for the classic

[Piru]

@A1260

So which benchmarks did you perform?

It's true that 1.4.5 is a bit aged already, but it should still perform quite well.

[downix]

AmigaMance wrote:
What are you talking about? Then how all these OS4 users run Heretic 2 on their A1?

Likely by recompiling it for OS4 native. Heretic II has been open sourced since 2000.

[krize]

A1260: You are so lame man, stop talking about things you know nothing about!!

[Kronos]

and that OS4 generally feels faster/snappier as a desktop etc. I suppose both claims are true?

That might be due to MOS-PUP having a rather "heavy" skin pre-installed as default and the use of debug-enabled Ambient builds.

Cut down the effects, get a debug-free Ambinet and you should have a fairer comparison.

[Fab12]

@A1260,

at least, when using MorphOS on powerup (i mostly used pre-1.4.5 versions, but that's also true for 1.4.5 with a fixed skin), you feel it's noticeably faster than 3.9 for all sorts of things. With Morphos, i gained some fps in games such as wipeout or heretic2, compared to 3.9+wos/w3d. Graphics and reactivity also felt much faster in general.

Somehow I don't see that kind of comments about OS4 in the different fora these days. I rather see people stating 3.9 feels snappier and some of them already went back on using 3.9 for serious usage.

Weird.

[AmigaMance]

@fab12
Although you are not addressing to me, i would like to make some comments to your post

With Morphos, i gained some fps in games such as wipeout or heretic2, compared to 3.9+wos/w3d.

I own both games and i have tested them under AmigaOS 3.9 ( optimized with various patches) and MOS. In Wipeout, i get 2-3 more FPS from MOS, but i get absolutely NO extra FPS in Heretic 2, for some reason. Also, i actually get MORE frame-skipping from Frogger (Native MOS version) in MOS, than i get in AOS 3.9 with the WOS/PUP version!.. Same goes for AMP. It is something that bugs me and nobody has been able to give me a reasonable explanation. "Heavy" Ambient and MUI settings should be irrelevant for the above mentioned cases, right?

I rather see people stating 3.9 feels snappier and some of them already went back on using 3.9 for serious usage.

I am one of them, except that i went back from MOS to 3.9. (I haven't tried OS4, yet) One of the reasons is that WorkBench feels MUCH faster and responsive than Ambient and bear in mind that my 68k CPU is only a 68040 at 25mhz!
And because i can see the reply coming: I do have minimize most Ambient and MUI settings to make it less CPU consuming. But you can't adjust everything, you know. For example, i feel that those transparent, non-blocking menus is a real killer and you can't change this. Trying to view a menu with many entries is so slaggish.
Another major reason that makes me prefer AOS 3.9 over MOS is stability. It might be something wrong with my system, but i've seen that i'm not the only A1200 user with stability problems under MOS.

Don't get me wrong please. I am NOT a MOS hater! I user MOS frequently, but only if i have to. In fact, i'm typing this very post right now under MOS because i needed to view a PDF file which the old and crappy 68k APDF couldn't handle. I also use MOS sometimes to squeeze some extra speed from 68k progs, but only if a WOS/PUP version isn't available.

[A1260]

by krize on 2007/12/19 13:16:46

A1260: You are so lame man, stop talking about things you know nothing about!!

muppetos lamers like you can go use lame morphos forums they have nothing to do here on amiga forums! :-x

[AmigaMance]

@A1260
Well, you have failed to give an answer to Piru so far and unless someone hijacked you account to make you look stupid:
http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=33317
I will tend to think that krize has a point.

[HenryCase]

A1260 wrote:
muppetos lamers like you can go use lame morphos forums they have nothing to do here on amiga forums! :-x

Grow up mate.

[Fab12]

@AmigaMance,

I haven't tried mos on pup for a long time (and even longer since i used 3.9), and i can't remember how frogger behaved, but maybe the additional 68k was welcome in that case, even though context switches cripple that kind of parallelism. You could also try to use wos/pup version of frogger, in case mos version had some issue.

BTW, i also can't check on powerup hardware right now, and results will probably differ, but i just checked a 320x240 mpeg file with both frogger and mplayer, and guess what, frogger eats 25% CPU while MPlayer eats 16% on my pegasos2 G4 (probably more recent libavcodec, a bit more optimized).
In any case, as you said, ambient and mui are irrelevant, as they just idle 99.9% of the time when unused.

About Ambient, the fact that it uses MUI adds some slight overhead. However, workbench is certainly NOT much faster. As a quick test, just try and display 1000 files in ambient and workbench, in icon and list mode, and see who wins. In any case, Ambient just does a lot more than Workbench, and everything comes at a price. And if you really really prefer Workbench, you can still use it on morphos instead of Ambient. Compatibility is a good thing sometimes.

Menus can also be made non-transparent by editing skin config, but from what i remember it was not really slower than magicmenu on os3.x.

[keropi]

A1260 wrote:

muppetos lamers like you can go use lame morphos forums they have nothing to do here on amiga forums! :-x

morphOS has nothing to do with the amiga ??!!!??... totally wrong A1260, totally wrong...