Posting on Geekhack: How much RAM and CPU does it take?

[zmurf]

MrA500 uses his Amiga 500 to do geekhack posts.

Yes... As I mentioned before, It should be possible. But I have a feeling that his A500 is somewhat expanded. But I went down to the basement yesterday and dug up my A600. That computer is almost entirely unexpanded. The only expansion it have is 1MB of extra chipram. I going to try to set it up over the weekend and see if I can post from it. It should be possible. Again as I mentioned before, I used to use that computer to browse the web. So posting at a vBulletin based forum shouldn't be a problem.

Oh good... a chance for me to show off. Yes, this post was done with an Amiga 500.
I think I'm using around 6Mb, but I could easily get that under 4Mb by using a lower screenmode.

Ok I didn't see this... So it is expanded..


I noticed last evening that the hard drive on my A600 had died... so I'll have to reinstall it with WB2.05. I will use AmiTCP together with a Lynx clone for net access. Fortunately on the A600 there is a PCMCIA port... so I'll just use the PCMCIA card from my A1200 to connect.

Post will hopefully come in a couple of days....

[Konrad]

One of the EEs at work built a "webserver" using a 4Mhz PIC, 9V battery, and 1GB CF card.  It works because apparently all you really need to service is HTML and FTP, it's too gutless to do any flash or scripts or other fancy stuff.  He claims it's superior for (his) mission-critical personal website because hackers can't exploit OS vulnerabilities.
 
If that works as a webserver, then an Amiga should be plenty macho to run a webclient browser.  Sort of.

[zmurf]

When I'm thinking about it... I spoke with a person at Breakpoint 2005 who used a Commodore 64 with a MMC Replay and a RR-Net to post threads in www.vintage-computer.com. Which is a vBulletin based forum.

He used Contiki-OS as operating system and used Contikis internal web browser to post with.

So that's it! You need a MOS6510 CPU running at almost 1MHz and 64kB of RAM to post at this forum...


(I actually own a C64 and a MMC Replay... I'll just have to get hold of a RR-Net unit and I can test this myself... )

[EverythingIBM]

When I'm thinking about it... I spoke with a person at Breakpoint 2005 who used a Commodore 64 with a MMC Replay and a RR-Net to post threads in www.vintage-computer.com. Which is a vBulletin based forum.

He used Contiki-OS as operating system and used Contikis internal web browser to post with.

So that's it! You need a MOS6510 CPU running at almost 1MHz and 64kB of RAM to post at this forum...


(I actually own a C64 and a MMC Replay... I'll just have to get hold of a RR-Net unit and I can test this myself... )

I still need to get various cables for my C64 to be used with the TV. Also need to get some RCA sega genesis cables -- I assume that'll give me way more clarity for a picture.

[Konrad]

I've played with projects that turn $20 MCU boards into fully functional C64 or Apple ][+ computers ... the machines are pathetically simple today, 65xx/Z80 CPUs @ ~1-2MHz.  Not enough RAM to store this page.  Such low resolution that this page would take about 50 screens anyhow.  The only "hard" part in building these toys can be finding the original ROM code, then finding any software titles which have survived the ages.
 
As fantastic as those machines were back then, I recall that a topheavy BBS could make them struggle.  I seriously doubt they could handle a typical GH thread full of hyperlinks and minor graphics.  Then again, there's little reason not to emulate them with faster CPUs and greater memory.

[zmurf]

I've played with projects that turn $20 MCU boards into fully functional C64 or Apple ][+ computers ... the machines are pathetically simple today, 65xx/Z80 CPUs @ ~1-2MHz.  Not enough RAM to store this page.  Such low resolution that this page would take about 50 screens anyhow.  The only "hard" part in building these toys can be finding the original ROM code, then finding any software titles which have survived the ages.

You can always buy a C-One. A fully reconfigurable FPGA computer. With the ARM expansion you can download firmware to make it act as a C64, A500, Apple ][ or anything you want really.

There is also a project called FPGA Arcade that makes pretty much the same thing. But to the FPGA Arcade there is a Minimig firmware core with AGA support (Demo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn4ZzLH6MpE )

As fantastic as those machines were back then, I recall that a topheavy BBS could make them struggle.  I seriously doubt they could handle a typical GH thread full of hyperlinks and minor graphics.

But the thing is that the browsers on these small systems most of the time don't render all of the pages. Just enough data to make them usable. Most often you don't need all pictures and so on. Take Lynx or Links for example. That data wouldn't be any problem at all for a C64 to show.

These new, small and optimised browser is probably much better at showing text then the old modem consoles were. I remember switching from an original modem console to one that was designed to show BBS material, and just that change made a huge difference.

[Konrad]

You can always buy a ... fully reconfigurable FPGA computer ...

lol, the $20 controllers I was referring to are FPGAs, CPLDs, ARMs, PICs, AVRs, Atmels, take your pick - any of these parts is huge overkill. Admittedly, some workarounds are needed (to emulate floppy drives, etc) and some special hardware cannot always be perfectly duplicated (C64 audio, for example). My "PDA" (previously a Nintendo DS) is now simultaneously an Apple][+/][e and C64 (with PS/2 keyboard connector, stylus touchscreen, and 2GB SD card interface).
 
Incidentally, it's an awe-inspiring realization that the equivalent of my ~1000 floppy disks full of software now all fit on a single half-empty SD card.
 

These new, small and optimised browser is probably much better at showing text then the old modem consoles were.

I think you're right. Software is obviously more capable now, especially on ancient machines that now pack then-inconceivable amounts of memory and speed increases. Software has gotten sloppy these days, though ... back then every byte and every clock you could squeeze mattered, small code runs faster.
I suppose I could view webpages on my "C64" ... but in my mind the final result just doesn't justify the programming effort involved. It'd be cheaper and easier to buy a junked 486 than build an FPGA board.

[zmurf]

I suppose I could view webpages on my "C64" ... but in my mind the final result just doesn't justify the programming effort involved. It'd be cheaper and easier to buy a junked 486 than build an FPGA board.

Or you could just use a modern computer... And if you necciserily want to run old stuff... use an emulator. (As you do on your PDA... and I do on my mobile phone (UAE4Droid is really capable.))

[Konrad]

lol, my "PDA" is the result of
1) hating stupid Nintendo/Gameboy titles,
2) noticing that - with rebuilt firmware and a few minor changes - the hardware would support two separate ancient simple computers (which each offered hundreds of game titles), and
3) for the hell of it, a moderately challenging hack project at the time
 
A modern phone would likely be more powerful, but the DS packed a pair of ARMs, twin displays (with touchscreen), and other hardware that didn't require rebuilding.
A phone screen and numpad doesn't seem as useful, though it could easily be done.  Actual processor capabilities aren't really relevant because of the magnitude of overkill.

[mr_a500]

One of the EEs at work built a "webserver" using a 4Mhz PIC, 9V battery, and 1GB CF card.

Oh yeah? Check out this Atari 2600 webserver. :wink:

[chimera15]

the original pentium 133mhz could run win95 and use the internet. well, probably not with the content that is on most sites now. of course the internet was designed for 33.6kbps back then.

Yeah when the web was first developed around 95 I had an old compaq 386 laptop with a black and white screen.  I was in Norway at the time, and bought Windows  95 at a store there, and got www service set up there which was quite a task in a foreign country.  For a while they had text only web, and then finally a few months later they had the first browsers.   That old 386 was pretty awesome back then, but it died on me.   I actually bought this computer at Fry's and it was under warranty, and they replaced it with a 486 which I still have for free. lol  Fry's was awesome back then.

Heh, similar model.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Compaq-Vintage-Contura-Aero-425-Laptop-/320579396183?pt=Laptops_Nov05&hash=item4aa4056257

I suppose with these old laptops it'd be possible to get a pcmcia lan card for them and windows95 and they'd be able to post here.  4mb of ram or so.  Would take forever though. lol

[Konrad]

That Atari webserver is a truly awe-inspiring piece of engineering.  Frightening, worrying, dismaying, yet awesome all the same.
 
I'm not particularly confident that 128 bytes (actually less, if any programs are being run) is sufficient to serve much web content ... the average SMS message can hold more ... but it clearly works. Missile Command is an excellent alternative to GH, provided a decent trackball is about.
 
Here's another laptop worth looking at.

[zmurf]

when the web was first developed around 95

wasn't graphical web officially released in late -92? I remember using Mosaic on my Amiga in late -93 (I have a clear memory of using a WWW application on the Amiga some days before Christmas in -93. It must have been Mosaic.).

First time I connected to the internet was in -91 through a BBS who routed me through his connection so I could read and post things on Usenet in real time.

That Atari webserver is a truly awe-inspiring piece of engineering.  Frightening, worrying, dismaying, yet awesome all the same.

You still have a webserver in Contiki wich run on the C64... I'll guess that is as "Frightening, worrying, dismaying, yet awesome all the same."

[zmurf]

That Atari webserver is a truly awe-inspiring piece of engineering.  Frightening, worrying, dismaying, yet awesome all the same.

You still have a webserver in Contiki wich run on the C64... I'll guess that is as "Frightening, worrying, dismaying, yet awesome all the same."

[chimera15]

wasn't graphical web officially released in late -92? I remember using Mosaic on my Amiga in late -93 (I have a clear memory of using a WWW application on the Amiga some days before Christmas in -93. It must have been Mosaic.).

First time I connected to the internet was in -91 through a BBS who routed me through his connection so I could read and post things on Usenet in real time.


You still have a webserver in Contiki wich run on the C64... I'll guess that is as "Frightening, worrying, dismaying, yet awesome all the same."

Yeah you're right, I guess it was just in Norway that I actually needed to access it in 95, so finally figured out what it was, cause I was cut off from Genie at that point.  I guess Mosiac was developed in 93, but maybe Norway didn't get it till 95 or something, at least not as a commercial/distributable product, but my memory is pretty bad for specific things like that as well.  I wonder what the deal was with the service providers back then as well, as I really had to ask a lot of questions at the phone company to find out who to talk to to get the service.  I don't think I ever had a dos version of mosiac though... Maybe in windows 3.1?  I'm pretty sure I didn't get it till I got windows 95....  It might have been a windows 3.1 application though...maybe that's where I got confused.

Yeah according to wikipedia Mosiac was first released in december of 1993, so basically early 1994 for Windows, which means it would have been a windows 3.1 release.  Windows 95 didn't come out till late 1995.



 I definitely remember dialing into a text based internet, in some capacity before using a browser though in 1995, although not sure of what the specifics of that were anymore.

[mr_a500]

That Atari webserver is a truly awe-inspiring piece of engineering.  Frightening, worrying, dismaying, yet awesome all the same.
 
I'm not particularly confident that 128 bytes (actually less, if any programs are being run) is sufficient to serve much web content ... the average SMS message can hold more ... but it clearly works. Missile Command is an excellent alternative to GH, provided a decent trackball is about.
 
Here's another laptop worth looking at.

Neat. That Atari 2600 webserver is a joke, by the way. That makes it not so frightening.

[Konrad]

I seriously contemplated the technical possibilities inherent in turning an Atari-era piece of junk into a serviceable webserver (of sorts).  That's the real joke.  And what's frightening is that I think it might even be possible (though it would use about 10,000 Atari's worth of hardware complexity, ie: one or two chips, to make it work).

[mr_a500]

Here's a real C64 webserver: http://58.6.118.18/

I didn't know there's also a C64 Twitter client. I'd never use Twitter, but it's interesting that it's possible to use it from a C64.

[Konrad]

I think even the sorry poor bastards from loser third world countries have already made the transition from C64s to something a little more modern. At least Pentium-IIIs running Win9x.
 
"Microservers" (for lack of a better term) seem more like a tinkering project "just because I can" sort of thing ... the people who experiment with this concept can already access vastly superior computing power.

[chimera15]

wasn't graphical web officially released in late -92? I remember using Mosaic on my Amiga in late -93 (I have a clear memory of using a WWW application on the Amiga some days before Christmas in -93. It must have been Mosaic.).

First time I connected to the internet was in -91 through a BBS who routed me through his connection so I could read and post things on Usenet in real time.


You still have a webserver in Contiki wich run on the C64... I'll guess that is as "Frightening, worrying, dismaying, yet awesome all the same."

Obviously the internet is different from the web.  The net was developed and in place as early as 89 or 90, and obviously earlier if you were government or military.  I was sending emails in 91 from my first failed college attempt dorm, where they had a couple old macs set up and hooked into the net.   When I came home from that miserable experience I joined genie in late 91 or early 92 and had access to email from the net that way, as well of course dialing into various bbs's and such.  The web wasn't really up, and certainly not popular till 94 or 95 at all, even in America.

[chimera15]

With the Amiga 500, I use a 56K modem, MiamiDX TCP/IP and IBrowse web browser. Unfortunately, A500 Ethernet adapters are rare and expensive. On the Amiga 3000 I'm using for this post, I use a USB Ethernet adapter (only 99Ē!), connected to high speed internet cable modem.

The Amiga 3000 is 16Mhz.

Ah, I thought you would be using dial up...  What isp still has dial in nodes?  Aol?  You still pay for a dial up isp?

[mr_a500]

Ah, I thought you would be using dial up...  What isp still has dial in nodes?  Aol?

I used a free dial up number in California (thankfully, I have free long distance to the US). I used to have a dial up ISP, but they converted to Microsoft servers (right after "partnering" with Microsoft, coincidentally) and totally ****ed everything up for non-Microsoft computers.

[zmurf]

Obviously the internet is different from the web.  The net was developed and in place as early as 89 or 90, and obviously earlier if you were government or military.

if you count  ARPANET universities have had internet since the -70ths ...

[bhtooefr]

Oh, hey, now I figured out how to make the text field multi-
line. Turns out, you just need to hit enter on the text fiel
d, and it expands.
Anyway, I've got a copy of Spectrum Internet Suite on its wa
y... that way, I'll be able to post from a IIGS running GS/O
S 6.0.1, a 65816 running at any speed I want between 2.6 and
 12.5 MHz, and 5 MiB RAM.

[D-EJ915]

Ah, I thought you would be using dial up...  What isp still has dial in nodes?  Aol?  You still pay for a dial up isp?

a lot of ISPs have them in case the other stuff goes down, I know cox communications does down here in southeast va

[microsoft windows]

There's still plenty of folks using dial up. A guy I know just got hooked up to the Internet and he's got dial-up.

[EverythingIBM]

There's still plenty of folks using dial up. A guy I know just got hooked up to the Internet and he's got dial-up.

I used dial-up for a long time, until a $60 bill came in the mail for overuse (idiotic considering it was outdated by then). That was around the time youtube wasn't owned by google yet.

So, no more dial-up for me.

[mike]

Obviously the internet is different from the web.  The net was developed and in place as early as 89 or 90, and obviously earlier if you were government or military.  I was sending emails in 91 from my first failed college attempt dorm, where they had a couple old macs set up and hooked into the net.   When I came home from that miserable experience I joined genie in late 91 or early 92 and had access to email from the net that way, as well of course dialing into various bbs's and such.  The web wasn't really up, and certainly not popular till 94 or 95 at all, even in America.

The DNS first showed up in 1983 and the first .com (symbolics.com) was registered in March 1985. The Internet pretty much dates from then.

As for the Web, I setup my first web server in 1992; about a year before the University I worked for had an Internet connection. At the time there were many different 'distributed information systems' - Gopher, Web, MIT's TechInfo.

Mosaic (one of the earliest GUI browsers - Lynx, a text based browser was available earlier) was first released in 1993 and pretty much started the popularity of the Web.

[zmurf]

The DNS first showed up in 1983 and the first .com (symbolics.com) was registered in March 1985. The Internet pretty much dates from then.

Naa!.. Everybody knows that the Internet was born in Japan the year 2001...

And that's a fact!

[chimera15]

a lot of ISPs have them in case the other stuff goes down, I know cox communications does down here in southeast va

Seriously?  You know we live probably right near each other? lol  What numbers?

[chimera15]

Anyone know how to change the bios of a motherboard so that it's not an unknown name for a custom/homebuilt system when tested on geekbench?

[Konrad]

Anyone know how to change the bios of a motherboard so that it's not an unknown name for a custom/homebuilt system when tested on geekbench?

If it's a socketed then you can easily swap the chip out with any pin-compatible PROM/EPROM part.
 
If it's an integrated EEPROM/Flash then you can (and probably should) just use software to rewrite it. You could manually desolder the part off the board, though there is then a risk of thermal damage and ESD corrupting the firmcode. Another chip (and/or socket to mount it) could then be installed.
 
Most modern PC mobos integrate the BIOS within the Southbridge/ICH component of the chipset, sometimes in the Winbond-style "Super I/O" chip. These parts are difficult to purchase individually, you'd likely need to salvage them from another mobo. Firmware is also encoded in other components: processors, RAM controllers, HDDs and ODDs, ethernet controllers, graphics cards, etc.
 
You can always remove the BIOS chip and replace it with a carrier board running a programmed MCU to emulate the BIOS; this is the most difficult but most versatile option. It might be easier to design an entire mobo from scratch than to reverse engineer one in this detail, although again there are difficulties in obtaining chipset parts which are not sold individually.
 
You might have better luck installing in-line devices which "stamp" unique hardware ID/characteristics onto any signals the machine sends to the outside world.  If your problems are OS-based (say, Windows thinks it's not genuine...) then there are any number of software workarounds - I don't want to get banned for dirty pirate talk so I'll just direct you to spend some time with google.
 
If your problems are being caused by a TPM or other encryption module then I don't think there's anything you can do. Serious EE hackers have defeated these systems, but I don't understand how.
 
Of course, you could always call tech support.

[erricrice]

Well, I kinda missed the bandwagon on this one, but anyway:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/284240


Yeah...I need some improvement in the memory department, kinda unbalanced.

[microsoft windows]

Those jerks on Geekbench didn't make a 16-bit version of their benchmark tester!

[Ekaros]

Hmm, with pre-fetching of Windows 7 and stuff:
32% phsical memory sub 10% CPU 59 Processes...
More detailed junk:
Physical Memory (MB)
Total 8191(yep...)
Cached 5178
Available 5502
Free 683

Kernel Memory (MB)
Paged 338
nonpaged 31

System
Handles 23870
Threads 892
Processes 59
Up Time 1:04:04:04 (WIN?)
Commit (MB) 2831/8189

331 924K Firefox
138 624K Plugin Container For Firefox Is it only me or are softwares getting somewhat large?

[chimera15]

Well, I kinda missed the bandwagon on this one, but anyway:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/284240


Yeah...I need some improvement in the memory department, kinda unbalanced.

Dang, you got an 8000 with an i5? That's better than most 920 i7's I've seen? How'd you do that?  What's a GBT___ GBTUACPI?

[chimera15]

If it's a socketed then you can easily swap the chip out with any pin-compatible PROM/EPROM part.
 
If it's an integrated EEPROM/Flash then you can (and probably should) just use software to rewrite it. You could manually desolder the part off the board, though there is then a risk of thermal damage and ESD corrupting the firmcode. Another chip (and/or socket to mount it) could then be installed.
 
Most modern PC mobos integrate the BIOS within the Southbridge/ICH component of the chipset, sometimes in the Winbond-style "Super I/O" chip. These parts are difficult to purchase individually, you'd likely need to salvage them from another mobo. Firmware is also encoded in other components: processors, RAM controllers, HDDs and ODDs, ethernet controllers, graphics cards, etc.
 
 
Of course, you could always call tech support.

I gotta pull a chip?  I can't modify the bios flash file or something? lol

What software should I use? Would a hex editor work do you think?

[Konrad]

I prefer WinHex, though any decent hex editor would work.  Most modern mobos use integrated flash firmware, though some models might use multiple chips or even sockets.  The mobo manufacturer's BIOS flash software is usually the best choice and avoids direct contact with the hardware.  You can always get generic flash software from Pheonix/Award or AMI, though it might not always work with any given board.
 
Modifying your firmware at the byte level is not trivial.  It contains critical BIOS code and data which provide the logical interface for the entire mobo chipset.  It contains the BIOS setup program and likely also contains megabytes of other software used for detection, diagnostics, and recovery.
 
You're unlikely to improve or add functionality unless you reverse engineer the entire mobo chipset and disassemble all the existing firmware code.  In fact, you're far more likely to kill or cripple your mobo.
 
The safest changes you can realistically expect to do would involve changing text strings and graphic images.  Many OEMs are paranoid bastards and employ checksums or other anti-tampering logic to prevent stuff like their copyright messages and part serial numbers from being altered.  What this means is that changing even a single innocuous byte could prevent the BIOS from loading, thus prevent the mobo from working.
 
Some OEMs provide software which will allow you to flash your own custom pre-boot images or text into the BIOS.  This might be good enough for your purpose.
 
SMBIOS editing/spoofing software is also available, a perhaps better alternative to actual BIOS flashing, though it can be tricky to use correctly.
 
Whatever you do, I recommend
- you disable all BIOS-level passwords before doing anything
- you backup your existing BIOS before continuing, then as always, actually confirm you can recover data from the backup before you move onward; you may need to reconfigure hardware jumpers or have a floppy drive (and disk)
- you make sure you're using the correct software for your particular BIOS and you follow the instructions carefully

[ch_123]

In fairness, that sounds like an awful lot of work just so that some benchmark software picks up your motherboard brand...

[Konrad]

Yeah, different benchmark software would be a smarter choice.  You could extrapolate a score by comparison of your machine against others, using results from some other benchmark as a reference.
 
Of course, not being able to even run a benchmark on your machine is a compelling statement about how mismatched the technological magnitude might be.
 
In all fairness, geekbench is not a very well-established or popular benchmark anyhow, perhaps not even a particularly accurate one.  Better results - along with a more complete database of results to compare against - would be achieved using one of the ones listed here.

[bhtooefr]

There's always nbench, which works across a rather wide array of platforms - I've even got a version that's compiled for RISC OS.

[microsoft windows]

Any of you all know of a Windows 3.1 benchmark tester?

[erricrice]

Dang, you got an 8000 with an i5? That's better than most 920 i7's I've seen? How'd you do that?  What's a GBT___ GBTUACPI?

I have absolutely no clue what that title is.  Probably choking on the Gigabyte motherboard given some other posts about this benchmark.

And yes, 8000+ is what you get once you hit 4 jiggabibbles.  That's a lot of jiggabibbles.

Anyway, my specs are:

i5 750 @ 4.0 GHz
4 GB GSkill 1600Mhz DDR3 (7-7-7-24)
GTX 260 216 Core 55nm
Gigabyte P55-UD3R
Seagate 1TB (3 platter)


Probably the last system I am going to ever have.  I only see reason to upgrade the hard drive once I fill this one, which probably won't be for a while yet.

[Konrad]

You'll likely end up getting an SSD ... then wondering why the hell you didn't do it years before.

[Konrad]

That's not zigmund froyd ... it's Santa Claus, merry xmas and patron saint of hookers.

[D-EJ915]

merry sexmas indeedy

[erricrice]

8000 4GHz i5 750 versus my lowly 3.6 GHz Q6700 6129

Pics of Girls licking a Sigmund Freud lollypop remind me that there is more to life than Penis Envy.

I suppose.

But mine's still bigger.

[Brodie337]

This post came from a 4.15GHz Phenom II 1055t hex core.

Thats more processing power than all of MW's computers combined, I'd think.

[microsoft windows]

I don't know. All of my computers would add up to 13.866 Ghz with 10.544GB of RAM. I think I've got you beat!

[microsoft windows]

Windows 95 on a 386? I like it!

Now you got to load on the flying toaster screen saver!