Yet Another SBC

Tim Rowledge tim at rowledge.org
Thu May 26 18:09:38 UTC 2005


Michael Rueger <michael at impara.de> wrote:

> Tim Rowledge wrote:
> 
> > memory access) so Squeak would be ok but not great in Morphic performance.
64Mb
> 
> Remember when app 60% Dorado (original smalltalk benchmark set) was 
> considered a quite usable Smalltalk machine. That is what, 0.5% of the 
> CPU power in this one?
My Iyonix is ~2.5 times faster than the OMAP in the nokia, and scores around 20
dorado. It ought to positively _fly_ but the big problem is in the UI side of
things. Morphic does a great deal more than monchrome MVC with a direct frame
buffer, and then has to worm through OS calls to finally get to the screen.
Even on my 1.5GHz pBook it feels sluggish!

The way to combat this is to force the people working on morphic (or indeed
tweak) UI stuff to use really slow machines. It's amazing how much optimisation
can get done that way.  


> 
> > memory access) so Squeak would be ok but not great in Morphic performance.
64Mb
> > of ram would be a bit tight with linux and x11 and gnome running all at
once.
> 
> It would be enough with a minimal Linux kernel and Squeak running in 
> frame buffer mode :-)
Yes, it probably would. Though the Squeak image would need a bit of shrinking
to leave much room for serious usage. I run with 60Mb of object space most of
the time (dispaly memory, OS usage not included) and it can be tight.


tim
--
Tim Rowledge, tim at rowledge.org, http://www.rowledge.org/tim
"Yummy" said Pooh, as he rotated Piglet slowly on the spit.



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list