Questions about the Pyra concept priorities and internal working


Kev2442

Still French
Joined
Nov 4, 2014
Messages
646
Location
42 (Loire) is the answer.
As I've been craving for Amiga knowledge for some time, I've stumbled upon the Natami project : http://www.natami.net/concept.htm

They say the following :

That the AMIGA CPU could direct access GFX memory was still an advantage, to which others system only catched up later.
It took Commodore 6 years to release AGA while the PC world invented hundreds of workarounds to speed up their system.

While the original AMIGA was a complete integrated system where the CPU and Hardware were working together,
we see this today only in game consoles.
I'd like to know how the Pyra is made as it's both a handheld console and a computer.

How does the internals work ? Is it made as a common PC-compatible with loose cooperation between the SoC's CPU and GPU, or is it meant to be highly hardware optimized like old-school gaming systems ?

By the way, what comes first into the decisions made for the system ? Linux is first meant for security rather than speed, whereas the older AmigaOS was all about speed optimizations.

What choices have you made for the Pyra ? How did you manage that smoothness while keeping the secure Debian core ?

Is there any room for further enhancements ? I know that the NEON and PowerVR still have to be fully implemented, but other than that, what do we have to do to make it even faster ?

All in all, where did you have to trade speed for security or the opposite ?
 
I'd like to know how the Pyra is made as it's both a handheld console and a computer.
All the development information is in the official Pyra thread for everyone to read....

How does the internals work ? Is it made as a common PC-compatible with loose cooperation between the SoC's CPU and GPU, or is it meant to be highly hardware optimized like old-school gaming systems ?
It's running an ARM Processor, so "PC" compatible is out the window, unless if you conciser slow x86 emulation. It's running a common Debian armhf Linux OS, the benefit of it being a common platform vs a "PC" computer which is an amalgam of computer parts makes it so that we can optimize things to specific hardware. However the OS work is all community driven by volunteers, there is not a huge group of paid developers making the OS perfect.
Is there any room for further enhancements ? I know that the NEON and PowerVR still have to be fully implemented, but other than that, what do we have to do to make it even faster ?
Umm sure, the SoC and Memory is on a removable daughterboard that can be replaced by something newer. And sure there are plenty of software avenues to make improvements, but like everything it needs skilled people to do.
All in all, where did you have to trade speed for security or the opposite ?
Speed and security are two separate incomparable things.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Pyra GPU (assuming it's like the Pandora GPU) is unlike PC graphics cards. It works on memory in the CPU's RAM - you point it at a block of memory, and some stuff to render or transform, and it blats it out to the memory space you pointed it to. You can then set the rasteriser at that memory to display it, or do something else with it if you want. So, if you like, the video memory is entirely accessible to the CPU too.


Linux is a server OS at heart, just like Windows or Mac OS are these days. On microcomputer hardware like the Amiga it wouldn't run especially well, though IIRC it is usable, but modern machines including handhelds run it a lot better, and the additional speed you'd have from a microcomputer OS on such a device would likely be outweighed by the additional complexity of writing your own drivers for all the peripherals, and porting software to it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you for your answers.

So the Pyra is more console-like with it's common memory, and security would be the top priority.

Then, what are the other compromises for speed ? I'm pretty sure Debian is not the lightest OS available, so apart from the use of Xfce, what has been done to date to lighten it ?

Off-topic : Is the OMAP5 a 4-core ? It's a big.LITTLE CPU so is it a real 4-core, or closer to 2 CPUs on a motherboard with a slower one ? It's not easy to compare the Pyra's potential to x86 Windows laptops.

Including Linux's lower memory usage and the OMAP5's better versatility and specific optimizations, what would be the closest Win7-8 computer specs performance-wise ?

I like to see it close to a low-budget laptop, maybe even better as these mostly come with 2-core CPUs and 2GBs of RAM. What's your guess ?
 
It isn't big.LITTLE.  It has two Cortex-A15 cores and two M4 cores.  The M4 cores aren't compatible with the A15, you can't just swap off to them the way you can in big.LITTLE architecture in order to automatically get better performance or battery life (depending on how you use them), they're co-processors that need to explicitly be programmed for, and not even all that great since they don't have floating point units.

It's not easy to compare the Pyra's potential to x86 Windows laptops.
Apples and oranges.  Don't even try to make the comparison.  They can both do laptop like things but they're completely different insides means any comparisons you draw will be superficial.  The only meaningful comparisons are end user ones, things like "does it load web pages quickly? Can it play 1080p video?" etc...


I like to see it close to a low-budget laptop
It's very expensive for a low-budget laptop.  If a laptop is what you want you will, without question, get better performance out of an x86 laptop for the same price.  The Pandora and therefore the Pyra isn't a laptop, it's something else entirely.If you want a handheld game console, get a PSP or a 3DS or something.  If you want a laptop, get a laptop.  If you want a slightly more portable laptop, get a netbook, or a tablet.  If you want a pocket computer with gaming controls that can function as all these things and don't mind paying for it then the Pyra is for you.

edit: and just to clarify, there are no "compromises in speed". Compromise suggests there's a choice when in fact the OMAP5 is the best EvilDragon could get his hands on in a reasonable time frame. The only possible point of compromise is on the internal NAND flash, I don't think he's decided what size and speed to go with yet.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I want a pocket computer with gaming controls that can function as all these things and don't mind paying for it so the Pyra is for me. :D

I own a PSP fat and a DS Lite. But as I mostly use them for emulation, and as I lack a laptop and my Wave II is limited and aging, the Pyra will sure solve my problem.

I was thinking about software compromises. With all the choices in packages, I'd like to know what are the priorities when it comes to choosing one or the other.

Do we need the most secure distro available ? The most popular so that its community can help out ? The lightest to keep most of the SoC's power free for other tasks ?
 
I was thinking about software compromises. With all the choices in packages, I'd like to know what are the priorities when it comes to choosing one or the other.
Do we need the most secure distro available ? The most popular so that its community can help out ? The lightest to keep most of the SoC's power free for other tasks ?
As far as I understand things (which isn't very far), debian-ARM was chosen because it 1) has a functional package manager and 2) has the best support (in terms of numbers of maintained applications).

I don't think there are significant differences between ARM linux distributions in terms of security, or in terms of speed, as long as a lightweight windowmanager is chosen.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Using the Pyra as a laptop (going by how abysmal the Pandora is at being a laptop) will only be a frustrating experience for you. Think carefully - the Pandora excels at gaming, and more specifically emulation rather than any one other task and that's the only area that it will do better than a desktop/netbook/laptop.

The Pyra will be more of the same - there' no radically different directions that they're taking it. Basically, the Pyra takes the already excellent Pandora and extends it with a faster CPU, more cores (well, one more) and a better screen.

I cannot wait to see what emulators will be released for it.

D.
 
I know I won't be able to do everything with a Pyra. But for that, I've got a desktop PC.

I'll always use my PC for gaming, movies, music composing, video editing and all.

But for browsing, documents writing, presentations and all these tasks, I'd like to do them everywhere.

So that's what I meant : a Pyra as much as I can, and my good ol' desktop for the other stuff.

I can't wait either to see what's the Pyra's potential regarding emulators.

The DC is very promising, so maybe we could get GC and PS2 as well.
 
DC is probably do-able, though will likely be slow (kind of like how N64 is slow-but-playable on a CC Pandora) - Saturn would likely be much better. PS2 will likely work but will almost certainly be very slow.

D.
 
DC is probably do-able, though will likely be slow (kind of like how N64 is slow-but-playable on a CC Pandora) - Saturn would likely be much better. PS2 will likely work but will almost certainly be very slow.


D.
Do you mean GC will be slow but playable? DC has already been shown as fullspeed.

I'm assuming we will get similar results as the Samsung Chromebook is getting now (if we get a GC emulator at all). Unfortunately Dolphin on the Chromebook does not seem at all playable in my opinion.
 
I don't think there are significant differences between ARM linux distributions in terms of security, or in terms of speed, as long as a lightweight windowmanager is chosen.
Yeah, the window manager is the main thing that makes some linuxes slower than others, at least when they're up and running. Booting should be pretty quick on newer debian, based on my experience of systemd on arch, and shutting down certainly quicker than ubuntu with unity.

In terms of security differences, different distros trade updatedness against security in the main. Arch (which does have a prototype ARM build these days) aims for ultimate uptodateness, while debian will happily stick with slightly older versions of stuff if they are proven to work (even if that means not all of your future peripherals work with stock debian). You can guarantee the Pyra will work with all of the peripherals it comes with though, and most you'll ever plug into it.


Again, comparing linux against microcomputer OSes, it does a few things a microcomputer doesn't do, like maintaining a network connection, and rotating logs. Most microcomputer OSes don't even make logs, so that's something linux does for extra security (although if the Pyra's like the Pandora, it won't keep any to avoid filling up the flash storage).
 
DC is probably do-able, though will likely be slow (kind of like how N64 is slow-but-playable on a CC Pandora) - Saturn would likely be much better. PS2 will likely work but will almost certainly be very slow.


D.
Do you mean GC will be slow but playable? DC has already been shown as fullspeed.

I'm assuming we will get similar results as the Samsung Chromebook is getting now (if we get a GC emulator at all). Unfortunately Dolphin on the Chromebook does not seem at all playable in my opinion.
I don't know, if you look at the official Dolphin YouTube channel, emulation on ARM is quickly becoming smooth and accurate.

It just takes someone to get it right. We all know about notaz and his PCSX ReARMed.

With the Pyra's common hardware and Dolphin's focus on ARM systems, this is perfectly worth considering.

Heck, even the PS2 could be considered as well given its lower specs. But it is more cycle-dependent so it's unimaginable for now.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know, if you look at the official Dolphin YouTube channel, emulation on ARM is quickly becoming smooth and accurate.
It just takes someone to get it right. We all know about notaz and his PCSX ReARMed.


With the Pyra's common hardware and Dolphin's focus on ARM systems, this is perfectly worth considering.


Heck, even the PS2 could be considered as well given its lower specs. But it is more cycle-dependent so it's unimaginable for now.
I tried looking for videos the other day to gage current performance. All the playable looking videos were being run on TK1 devices. I definitely am hoping someone will write something specifically optimized for the Pyra that will get us the best performance possible, but I'm assuming it will take notaz and exo level skill for us to see any gains.

EDIT: Just looked again, and this one is running better than any of the others I saw. I believe it is running on an Exynos 5 which could maybe be compared to the OMAP5 in terms of CPU. Not sure how the GPU stacks up, but from the comments I have seen, GPU is what limits Dolphin on the Samsung Chromebooks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top