On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 01:34:37AM +0200, Antonello wrote: > On Wednesday 20 August 2003 00:37, Martin wrote: > > > What sort of tasks? I can believe heavily FP intensive tasks (like > > multimedia) are easier on an Athlon (even better on a PPC 9450 Iwould > > have thought) but I find that the significant cache on the processor I'm > > using makes a big difference on lots of other stuff. Plus the lower (in
You're living in a dream world ~:^) Don't get wrong, I'm no -anything- lover, and my company sells US2 based machines, but in the 6 years between when a 333 MHz US2 U5/10 was kinda state of the art, and when the Athlon XP2000 was kinda state of the art, X86 technology just got up and left the solar system. A more appropriate question is which would you rather have: the 333MHz U5 or a 450MHz P2 from roughly the same era? The ultraSPARC box obviously has much better performance headroom and therefore a much longer useful lifespan. > At the moment, I can only say, with a reasonable amount of background, that > the system is slow during video decoding (MPEGx at least) probably due to DMA > issues between the IDE controller and the PCI integrated video controller. > I'll surely investigate more in the future. Does mplayer use VIS? I know on my box that has mplayer (x86 ville) it uses far more CPU with the SDL than when I specify xv as the video output device. Can you try that? And what happens if you specify something like an 8MB cache size? a
