[openbeos] Re: A question/concern re OSS
- From: "Michael Phipps" <mphipps1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 23:49:17 -0500
>An honest answer, from someone who's been there... AMD doesn't have
>anything to gain by helping OBOS, BUT OBOS, as was BeOS, is likely to
>work with most all AMD motherboards/processors anyway., though not take
>advantage of any special features :(
Don't count on that. :-) I want a Dual Athlon in the worst way.
>you all might find this interesting
>Well, though I'm not with AMD anymore. I was testing motherboard
>chipsets and data buses with K6 and K7(athlon). I was even running
>BeOS on Dual K7 systems in '98! Why they took 2 years to release; one
>can only guess. BeOS ran like a champ on every board/processor that
>came through during '97-'98.
Sniff. Sniff. I *knew* I should have moved to Texas. :-)
>I spent most time analyzing the PCI and AGP buses. We used a nifty
>tool that would measure the efficiency (actual data : overhead traffic)
>of the PCI bus between North and South Bridges. It was quite
>revealling to look at various OSs.
>
>Win98 generally sat at around 5% efficiency, only reaching 10% while
>viewing a movie fullscreen at 640x480 resolution. NT sat around 12%,
>and could peak at 35% with the same movie situation. BeOS, on the
>other hand, remained at 50%, whether or not it was idling, or you were
>running 6 movies to a rotating cube, while capturing/watching video via
>USB cameras, playing music, etc., etc.
:-) That, alone, might be a good reason for AMD to offer some help.
[snip]
>Shannon
Thanks for sharing!
>"there'll be one corporation, selling one little box, it'll be what you
>want, and tell you what you want, and cost what ever you've got" -Greg
>Brown
Over my dead body. :-)
Other related posts:
