Sheepshaver, Basilisk tests
- Because so much of the WP list has become devoted to Sheepshaver, I
wonder if anyone has read the in-depth performance tests conducted by
Jonathan Hoyle, a Mac engineer at Kodak. The link to the article is
as follows (I hope the line wraps aren't a problem):
I should make a disclaimer right off: I'm running a G4 Mac Mini,
10.4.11, with no plans to upgrade to Leopard; I'm very happy with the
OSX and Classic that I have. As a result, I haven't downloaded or
installed Sheepshaver, and, while I've read many of the messages
posted on this topic, I don't have first-hand experience with it--and
I don't have an ax to grind about it.
\That said, Hoyle's article is interesting because he finds that
Sheepshaver's performance varies enormously depending on what
hardware it's run on. For example, it ran very well (and outperformed
Classic) on a G4 with dual 1.25GHz processors, but about the same
speed on a G5 dual 2.0GHz system (even thought the G5's processor
runs at nearly twice the speed of the G4). He theorizes that
Sheepshaver is optimized for the Dual G4. But on a Powerbook G4 1.5
GHz system, Sheepshaver runs at only half the speed of Classic.
Performance of Sheepshaver, according to his tests, drops
dramatically when run on an Intel-based machine, apparently because
of the multiple emulations. Ironically, Hoyle concludes that
Sheepshaver's best performance (the Dual G4) is on machines that he
suggests are least likely to upgrade to Leopard (where Apple
recommends a G5). And apparently PowerPC performance drops about 10%
when switching from Tiger to Leopard.
While he finds more limitations overall to Basilisk (about which I
know nothing), he concludes that Intel Mac users are better off
(performance wise) running 68K versions of software under Basilisk
than Power PC versions under Sheepshaver.
I just wondered what anyone who might have read this analysis thought
of it. His test data seem fairly impressive.
“No dark sarcasm in the classroom”
--Roger Waters, “Another Brick in the Wall, Part 2”
from Pink Floyd, The Wall
- On 14 Feb 2008, at 22h24, Rick Albright wrote:
> The link to the article isWell, they were of course. To avoid such unpleasantness ;-) always
> as follows (I hope the line wraps aren't a problem):
put <angle brackets> around your URL, like so:
À Traduire - 206-11 Charlevoix Mtl H3J 2V9