Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MIPS Loongson 3A Benchmarks On Debian

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by Kano View Post
    Well the first xbox was x86 and the next ps4 will use x86 as well.Certainly you can use consoles with power ppc/cell core for games - but those do NOT run wine. You can forget Vbox for 3d games, vmware might be a tiny bit better, but still crap. Those systems are not meant for hardcore gaming.
    The xbox360 do not run x86 and the xbox720 will not run x86.
    And really wine was not the tropic at all but you claim it anyway: "but those do NOT run wine.".
    If you run it in a full emulation you can use windows7 there is no need for wine at all.
    And I don't think a closed source solution like vmware will work with the Loongson cpu.
    The ps4 only use standard PC hardware because they failed with the cell in the ps3.
    Microsoft instead run successfully without x86 hardware this means the failure of Sony is not a general failure of non x86 hardware.
    The Loongson CPU only do have full featured cores this means there is no Fail-by-design like the cell Sony chip with 2 different core designs.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by maldorordiscord View Post
      quat is in use in modern English:
      http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=quat
      " QUAT
      Slang for Quarter usually used in drug circles.
      'Yo, you got a quat fo' tree five?'
      Translation: "Pardon me, but do you still have a Quarter of (name your favorite drug here) for three hundred and fifty dollars?""
      A quarter is one fourth. Sou you want to have a machine with a fourth of a core?

      Quat is the short therm of Quaternary what means "consisting of four parts" source:
      "Quaternary ammonium cations, also known as quats" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternary_ammonium_cation
      No, quats are the short term for Quaternary ammonium cations, not for quaternary only. Your reading skills suck.

      Now you mix up stuff because its basically a vector processor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_processor
      And you can translate the instructions in another format.
      Because the vector connections are linearly linked.
      You mix up the format with the vector processing them self but you can translate the format and do the vector processing with the same result.
      This translation work drain your performance to 70%....
      Source? And don't provide a link to SIMD or something like that, I want a link where it clearly is stated that those CPUs can handle SSE and that the performance compared to native SSE is 70%.

      What the hell you talking about ? the Loongson 3B do have 2x256bit per core vector units and the Loongson 3C do have 2x512bit vector units. The 3C do have your "1024bit" in vector.
      So after you realized that your math sucks you decided to talk about a different processor. Nice.

      Big insulting words for the fact you lost on all tropics
      You have still not managed how to use a spell checker? The word tropic doesn't make any sense in this context.
      Get over it Qaridarium, you are not always right.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
        A quarter is one fourth. Sou you want to have a machine with a fourth of a core? No, quats are the short term for Quaternary ammonium cations, not for quaternary only. Your reading skills suck.
        Its magic you turn from : "there is no word quat in the English language" to "the word quat means pustule" to "there is no connection between the number 4 and the word quat" to "the word quat means A quarter is one fourth." to "Quat means 4 but only as a short therm of Quaternary ammonium cations"

        so many conflicting viewpoints shame on you.

        To show you some logic problems:
        If the word quat means pustule then your starting viewpoint "there is no word quat in the English language" is wrong.
        If there is no connection between the word quat and the number 4 then its impossible that "the word quat means A quarter is one fourth." means its wrong.
        If the word quat only means quarter is one fourth then it can not mean 4 pieces in the therm Quaternary ammonium cations this means its also wrong.
        All your absolute viewpoints are refuted by ***Logic***!.

        The logic result is: language is more flexible than you expected.

        Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
        Source? And don't provide a link to SIMD or something like that, I want a link where it clearly is stated that those CPUs can handle SSE and that the performance compared to native SSE is 70%.
        http://www.computer.org/portal/web/c...109/MM.2009.30
        without a SSE emulation they would never get 70% of the speed.

        Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
        So after you realized that your math sucks you decided to talk about a different processor. Nice.
        Its only your problem because I always talk about Loongson 3A,3B,3C
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loongso...specifications
        I've always said that they will only be competitive with the 3C and 28nm.

        Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
        You have still not managed how to use a spell checker? The word tropic doesn't make any sense in this context.
        Wow you find a typos tropic versus topic congratulations.

        Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
        Get over it Qaridarium, you are not always right.
        Now you are honoring me with Qaridarium name again but I'm still right.
        I proved you with logic that the word quat can be used in the meaning of 4 and the emulation of SSE code is the main task to speed up x86 code.
        Last edited by maldorordiscord; 07-07-2012, 01:02 PM.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by maldorordiscord View Post
          Its magic you turn from : "there is no word quat in the English language" to "the word quat means pustule" to "there is no connection between the number 4 and the word quat" to "the word quat means A quarter is one fourth." to "Quat means 4 but only as a short therm of Quaternary ammonium cations"

          so many conflicting viewpoints shame on you.

          To show you some logic problems:
          If the word quat means pustule then your starting viewpoint "there is no word quat in the English language" is wrong.
          If there is no connection between the word quat and the number 4 then its impossible that "the word quat means A quarter is one fourth." means its wrong.
          If the word quat only means quarter is one fourth then it can not mean 4 pieces in the therm Quaternary ammonium cations this means its also wrong.
          All your absolute viewpoints are refuted by ***Logic***!
          You are right, I was wrong with the statement: There is no word quat in the English language.
          Also the statement: There is no word quat related to the number four.
          Does that magically make such a construct as a quat-core CPU correct? Let us make a simple test and substitute the quat in this word with the definitions you gave us.
          1. Your definition: quat as a slang word for quarter. A quarter CPU. Doesn't sound correct.
          2. Your definition: quat as a short form of quaternary ammonium cations. A quaternary ammonium cations CPU. Nope, that isn't it also.
          So do you have some more definitions we can try instead of just admitting that you made a mistake? Or will you try to redefine language further?


          http://www.computer.org/portal/web/c...109/MM.2009.30
          without a SSE emulation they would never get 70% of the speed.
          Neither x86, SSE nor any number 70 are on that site. So you didn't provide a proof for your claims again. Please show us a proof for your statements.

          Now you are honoring me with Qaridarium name again but I'm still right.
          You are not right, as shown above. And it is pretty obvious that you are Qaridarium, you have the same style of argumentation, the same style of posting and you even make the same spelling errors.

          I proved you with logic that the word quat can be used in the meaning of 4
          Have you? I can't see anything of that.
          the emulation of SSE code is the main task to speed up x86 code.
          Can't see that either. You know that SSE is not part of the IA32 specification, do you?

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
            You are right, I was wrong with the statement: There is no word quat in the English language.
            Also the statement: There is no word quat related to the number four.
            I am surprised that you are capable of learning although this seems impossible with your inflexible way of thinking.
            Your inflexible way of thinking force you to do necrophilia on typos:

            Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
            Does that magically make such a construct as a quat-core CPU correct?
            In a flexible way of thinking the reader can get what I mean and even more than that in a complex and abstract way it's correct to.
            This example shows more about your inflexible way of thinking: because yes its true for a simple not complicated human without any flexible thinking ability only "quad-core" is true.

            Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
            Let us make a simple test and substitute the quat in this word with the definitions you gave us.
            1. Your definition: quat as a slang word for quarter. A quarter CPU. Doesn't sound correct.
            Its funny you did not understand what I'm doing I only post this here in the forum because of your claim: "There is no word quat related to the number four." even its (1/4) in this meaning there is still the number four in it. My goal was not to refute you complete with this my goal was to refute a part of your claims means this part: "There is no word quat related to the number four.".
            Your assumptions why it can not be properly were wrong thats a partial success for me.
            And there was another partial success for me because you claimed the word quat mean pustule.
            This proves that you do fail. even more in a row.
            This is your lack of integrity but you need integrity to teach me.
            Instead of this I teach you!

            Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
            2. Your definition: quat as a short form of quaternary ammonium cations. A quaternary ammonium cations CPU. Nope, that isn't it also.
            Thats the version of your static thinking in a complex way a word is always connected with the subject and the subject is Computer-Processors.
            This means the word quat means in chemistry always: quaternary ammonium cations but this link is wrong for the subject Computer-Processors with the subject Computer-Processors the word quat can only valid if the meaning is only quaternary and this word alone means: consisting of four parts
            This means a human with logic and the capacity for abstract thinking finds out what it means to mean in a result of this thinking process the logic circuit can therefore only be: a computer die consisting of four parts
            You probably will not understand this abstract proof guide again and you will refuse it again.
            But I'm sure with more research a less abstract explanation is also possible.

            Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
            So do you have some more definitions we can try instead of just admitting that you made a mistake? Or will you try to redefine language further?
            I think my logical explanation fit perfect the core of it is the change of the meaning of a word if the subject change you try to use the chemistry meaning of the word quat to refute that there is a meaning of the word quat if the word if used in a computer/chip tropic but the only valid link is the word quaternary and the meaning of quaternary in a computer topic fit perfect.
            Its more than simple you are a Intelligent human but only in a static way of thinking and I'm a Intelligent human but only in a complex and abstract way of thinking and both ways do have strengthen and weaken and we both do a mistake my mistake is that I think humans are flexible in thinking and your mistake is than you think humans are static in thinking.
            The secret is that the world can use both, depending on the operational purpose.

            With your inflexible way of thinking I'm sure you will refuse it again.
            Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
            Neither x86, SSE nor any number 70 are on that site. So you didn't provide a proof for your claims again. Please show us a proof for your statements. Can't see that either. You know that SSE is not part of the IA32 specification, do you?
            That side is a report of a scientific work you have to order the scientific work to read it.
            Another example about the possibility of translating mmx and sse code into loongson code is on this website:
            http://mattst88.com/blog/2012/05/17/...and%20Results/
            mattst88 is also a forum member we can ask him about this tropic.
            Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
            You are not right, as shown above. And it is pretty obvious that you are Qaridarium, you have the same style of argumentation, the same style of posting and you even make the same spelling errors.
            Just to enlighten you a style of argumentation is not a prove.
            Also the style of posting is not a prove.
            Even spelling errors are not a prove.
            Also a purposely picked nickname inspired by Qaridarium is not a prove.
            And purposely jokes about Qaridarium's writing style are not a prove.
            And your hating on Qaridarium is no evidence at all.

            Comment


            • #96
              @maldorordiscord

              you are so clever that you forgot that xbox 360 is the second xbox!

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by maldorordiscord View Post
                I am surprised that you are capable of learning although this seems impossible with your inflexible way of thinking.
                Your inflexible way of thinking force you to do necrophilia on typos:



                In a flexible way of thinking the reader can get what I mean and even more than that in a complex and abstract way it's correct to.
                This example shows more about your inflexible way of thinking: because yes its true for a simple not complicated human without any flexible thinking ability only "quad-core" is true.



                Its funny you did not understand what I'm doing I only post this here in the forum because of your claim: "There is no word quat related to the number four." even its (1/4) in this meaning there is still the number four in it. My goal was not to refute you complete with this my goal was to refute a part of your claims means this part: "There is no word quat related to the number four.".
                Your assumptions why it can not be properly were wrong thats a partial success for me.
                And there was another partial success for me because you claimed the word quat mean pustule.
                This proves that you do fail. even more in a row.
                This is your lack of integrity but you need integrity to teach me.
                Instead of this I teach you!


                Thats the version of your static thinking in a complex way a word is always connected with the subject and the subject is Computer-Processors.
                This means the word quat means in chemistry always: quaternary ammonium cations but this link is wrong for the subject Computer-Processors with the subject Computer-Processors the word quat can only valid if the meaning is only quaternary and this word alone means: consisting of four parts
                This means a human with logic and the capacity for abstract thinking finds out what it means to mean in a result of this thinking process the logic circuit can therefore only be: a computer die consisting of four parts
                You probably will not understand this abstract proof guide again and you will refuse it again.
                But I'm sure with more research a less abstract explanation is also possible.



                I think my logical explanation fit perfect the core of it is the change of the meaning of a word if the subject change you try to use the chemistry meaning of the word quat to refute that there is a meaning of the word quat if the word if used in a computer/chip tropic but the only valid link is the word quaternary and the meaning of quaternary in a computer topic fit perfect.
                Its more than simple you are a Intelligent human but only in a static way of thinking and I'm a Intelligent human but only in a complex and abstract way of thinking and both ways do have strengthen and weaken and we both do a mistake my mistake is that I think humans are flexible in thinking and your mistake is than you think humans are static in thinking.
                The secret is that the world can use both, depending on the operational purpose.

                With your inflexible way of thinking I'm sure you will refuse it again.
                So basically you are saying: I am too lazy/incapable of installing a spellchecker and actually use it, so you have to be more flexible while I rape the English language. No, I don't think so. Oh, by the way, a quat is a pustule and, unlike you, I can prove that: http://www.websters-online-dictionar...finitions/Quat

                That side is a report of a scientific work you have to order the scientific work to read it.
                Another example about the possibility of translating mmx and sse code into loongson code is on this website:
                http://mattst88.com/blog/2012/05/17/...and%20Results/
                mattst88 is also a forum member we can ask him about this tropic.
                Please show me the part in that text were the author states that he is translating SSE into Loongson's SIMD format. He is stating that he has done that that with MMX on a Loongson 2F, which was possible because it has a 64 bit SIMD unit that is somewhat similar to MMX. You still fail to give a proof for your claims. Also, I don't think to spend 19$ on an article that I think will also not contain a proof for your claims.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
                  So basically you are saying: I am too lazy/incapable of installing a spellchecker and actually use it, so you have to be more flexible while I rape the English language. No, I don't think so. Oh, by the way, a quat is a pustule and, unlike you, I can prove that: http://www.websters-online-dictionar...finitions/Quat
                  You only prove that you are unwilling or unable to follow a logical argument.
                  In both cases it is impossible for me to communicate with you further in this regard.

                  Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
                  Please show me the part in that text were the author states that he is translating SSE into Loongson's SIMD format. He is stating that he has done that that with MMX on a Loongson 2F, which was possible because it has a 64 bit SIMD unit that is somewhat similar to MMX. You still fail to give a proof for your claims. Also, I don't think to spend 19$ on an article that I think will also not contain a proof for your claims.
                  Its more than simple we just ask mattst88 as a expert.
                  Its pure logic if its possible for MMX code then its also possible for SSE code.

                  I write "mattst88" this message:

                  Is it possible to accelerate Intel-SSE code with an longson 3(x) CPU in qemu?
                  Please we need your help as a expert please answer this question.
                  Your answer would help to conciliation a dispute about this subject.

                  http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...arks-On-Debian

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by maldorordiscord View Post
                    Now you are honoring me with Qaridarium name again but I'm still right.
                    Q, you should at least change your IP address.

                    BTW, your x86 emulation with your old PowerPC was a dead give away as well.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                      Q, you should at least change your IP address.
                      So now we have a proof that moldorordiscord is Qaridarium. This means we now know that he is a liar and that he is circumventing the moderator decisions. Why isn't he banned yet?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by TobiSGD View Post
                        Why isn't he banned yet?
                        I'll let Michael do the heavy hitting.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                          Q, you should at least change your IP address.

                          BTW, your x86 emulation with your old PowerPC was a dead give away as well.
                          I do not have a Internet connection contract at all. This means its not my IP address at all.
                          The exact identification of a person over the ip address in a multi-user household with a unencrypted wireless LAN is also questionable.
                          The point that Qaridarium is logged into his banned account just to give you an IP address update is of course, meaningless.

                          Now we come to the clever part because I wrote that I've emulated the x86 stuff on a PowerPC I can only be Q on the other side TobiSGD and Kano did not believe that part at all.

                          I am happy that you believe me that i did emulate x86 stuff on a PowerPC.
                          (Irony) that is, of course, the ultimate proof that I am Q(/Irony)

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                            I'll let Michael do the heavy hitting.
                            Maybe he has no time and no lust? I should offer myself as a helper.

                            I'm good in banning people

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by maldorordiscord View Post
                              I do not have a Internet connection contract at all. This means its not my IP address at all.
                              The exact identification of a person over the ip address in a multi-user household with a unencrypted wireless LAN is also questionable.
                              The point that Qaridarium is logged into his banned account just to give you an IP address update is of course, meaningless.

                              Now we come to the clever part because I wrote that I've emulated the x86 stuff on a PowerPC I can only be Q on the other side TobiSGD and Kano did not believe that part at all.

                              I am happy that you believe me that i did emulate x86 stuff on a PowerPC.
                              (Irony) that is, of course, the ultimate proof that I am Q(/Irony)

                              If it walks like a duck, types like a duck, logs in from the same location like a duck, chances are heavily that is a duck.

                              And of course x86 were emulated on the PPC, Macs long were emulating PC's (although nowhere near including MMX or SSE and it worked like shit). You should remember that from your Power Mac 5x00.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                                If it walks like a duck, types like a duck, logs in from the same location like a duck, chances are heavily that is a duck.
                                haha thats funny and you are the duck butcher who care about every ducks personality right?

                                Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                                And of course x86 were emulated on the PPC, Macs long were emulating PC's (although nowhere near including MMX or SSE and it worked like shit). You should remember that from your Power Mac 5x00.
                                You disappoint me there was no "power mac" with that CPU.
                                The only ugly apple with that kind of cpu was the: macintosh performa 5200

                                In your general sentencing you could at least be accurate.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X