Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Sheepshaver, Basilisk tests

Expand Messages
  • Rick Albright
    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
    Message 1 of 2 , Feb 14, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      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):
      http://www.maccompanion.com/macc/archives/December2007/Columns/
      AccordingtoHoyle.htm

      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
      -------------------------------------------
      Rick Albright
      logres@...
    • Paul Cowan
      ... Well, they were of course. To avoid such unpleasantness ;-) always put around your URL, like so:
      Message 2 of 2 , Feb 14, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        On 14 Feb 2008, at 22h24, Rick Albright wrote:

        > The link to the article is
        > as follows (I hope the line wraps aren't a problem):
        > http://www.maccompanion.com/macc/archives/December2007/Columns/
        > AccordingtoHoyle.htm


        Well, they were of course. To avoid such unpleasantness ;-) always
        put <angle brackets> around your URL, like so:

        <http://www.maccompanion.com/macc/archives/December2007/Columns/
        AccordingtoHoyle.htm>.

        Au plaisir,


        Paul Cowan

        ---

        À Traduire - 206-11 Charlevoix Mtl H3J 2V9
        mailto:paul.cowan@...
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.